U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Devito M, Farrell P, Hagiwara S, et al. Value of Information Case Study on the Human Health and Economic Trade-offs Associated with the Timeliness, Uncertainty, and Costs of the Draft EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP). Washington (DC): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2024 Jul.

Cover of Value of Information Case Study on the Human Health and Economic Trade-offs Associated with the Timeliness, Uncertainty, and Costs of the Draft EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP)

Value of Information Case Study on the Human Health and Economic Trade-offs Associated with the Timeliness, Uncertainty, and Costs of the Draft EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP).

Show details

9REFERENCES

  1. Belova A, Fann N, Haskell J, Hubbell B, Narayan T. 2020. Estimating Lifetime Cost of Illness. An Application to Asthma. Ann Am Thorac Soc 17:1558–1569. [PubMed: 32931705]
  2. Biryol D, Nicolas Cl Wambaugh J, Phillips K, Isaacs K. 2017. High-throughput dietary exposure predictions for chemical migrants from food contact substances for use in chemical prioritization. Environ Int 108:185–194. [PMC free article: PMC5894819] [PubMed: 28865378]
  3. Bottini AA, Hartung T. 2009. Food for thought... on the economics of animal testing. ALTEX 26:3–16. [PubMed: 19326029]
  4. Bucher JR. 2002. The National Toxicology Program rodent bioassay: designs, interpretations, and scientific contributions. Ann N Y Acad Sci 982:198–207. [PubMed: 12562638]
  5. Buescher AV, Cidav Z, Knapp M, Mandell DS. 2014. Costs of autism spectrum disorders in the United Kingdom and the United States. JAMA Pediatr 168:721–728. [PubMed: 24911948]
  6. Chiu WA, Slob W. 2015. A Unified Probabilistic Framework for Dose-Response Assessment of Human Health Effects. Environ Health Perspect 123:1241–1254. [PMC free article: PMC4671238] [PubMed: 26006063]
  7. Chiu WA, Axelrad DA, Dalaijamts C, Dockins C, Shao K, Shapiro AJ, et al 2018. Beyond the RfD: Broad Application of a Probabilistic Approach to Improve Chemical Dose-Response Assessments for Noncancer Effects. Environ Health Perspect 126:067009. [PMC free article: PMC6084844] [PubMed: 29968566]
  8. Cote I, Anastas PT, Birnbaum LS, Clark RM, Dix DJ, Edwards SW, et al 2012. Advancing the next generation of health risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 120:1499–1502. [PMC free article: PMC3556615] [PubMed: 22875311]
  9. ECHA. 2021. Costs and benefits of REACH restrictions proposed between 2016-2020. ECHA-21-R-02-EN. Helsinki, Finland:European Chemicals Agency.
  10. EEA. 2018. Chemicals for a Sustainable Future - Report of the EEA Scientific Committee Seminar. 978–92-9213-936-0. Luxembourg:European Environment Agency.
  11. EPA. 2002. A Review of the Reference Dose and Reference Concentration Processes. EPA/630/P-02/002F. Washington, DC:US Environmental Protection Agency.
  12. EPA. 2004. Review of the revised analytical plan for EPA’s Second Prospective Analysis— Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act 1990—2020, An Advisory by a Special Panel of the Advisory Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis. EPA-SAB-COUNCIL-ADV-04-004.
  13. EPA. 2009. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. EPA-540-R-070–002. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  14. EPA. 2010. Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses. EPA 240-R-10–001. Washington, DC:National Center for Environmental Economics.
  15. EPA. 2011a. Recommended use of body weight 3/4 as the default method in derivation of the oral reference dose. EPA/100/R-11/0001. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  16. EPA. 2011b. Emission Factor Supporting Documentation for the Final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. EPA-454/R-11–012. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  17. EPA. 2011c. Exposure Factors Handbook. EPA/600/R-09/052F. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  18. EPA. 2013. Regulatory impact analysis for the final revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter. EPA-452/R-12-005. Research Triangle Park, NC:U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts Division.
  19. EPA. 2014. Framework for Human Health Risk Assessment to Inform Decision Making. EPA/100/R-14/001. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  20. EPA. 2021. Estimating PM2.5- and Ozone-Attributable Health Benefits. EPA-HQ-OAR-20200272. EPA:US Environmental Protection Agency.
  21. EPA. 2022a. Our nation's air: status and trends through 2021. Available: https://gispub​.epa.gov​/air/trendsreport/2022/#home [accessed 01/14/2023.
  22. EPA. 2022b. Mortality Risk Valuation. Available: https://www​.epa.gov/environmental-economics​/mortality-risk-valuation [accessed 1/19/2023.
  23. EPA. 2022c. ORD Staff Handook for Developing IRIS Assessments. EPA 600/R-22/268. Research Triangle Park, NC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  24. EPA. 2024a. Economic Analysis for the Final Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances National Primary Drinking Water Regulation. EPA-815-R-24-001. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  25. EPA. 2024b. Standard Methods for Development of EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Products (ETAPs). EPA/600/X-23/083. Research Triangle Park, NC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  26. EPA. 2024c. Scientific Studies Supporting Development of Transcriptomic Points of Departure for EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Products (ETAPs). EPA/600/X-23/084. Research Triangle Park, NC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  27. Faustman EM, Omenn GS. 2015. Risk Assessment. In: Casarettand Doull's Essentials of Toxicology, Part Third (Klaassen CD, Watkins JB III, eds). New York:McGraw-Hill.
  28. Finkel AM, Evans JS. 1987. Evaluating the benefits of uncertainty reduction in environmental health risk management. JAPCA 37:1164–1171. [PubMed: 3129543]
  29. Ganz ML. 2007. The lifetime distribution of the incremental societal costs of autism. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 161:343–349. [PubMed: 17404130]
  30. Gwinn WM, Auerbach SS, Parham F, Stout MD, Waidyanatha S, Mutlu E, et al 2020. Evaluation of 5-day In Vivo Rat Liver and Kidney With High-throughput Transcriptomics for Estimating Benchmark Doses of Apical Outcomes. Toxicol Sci 176:343–354. [PMC free article: PMC7416315] [PubMed: 32492150]
  31. Hagiwara S, Paoli GM, Price PS, Gwinn MR, Guiseppi-Elie A, Farrell PJ, et al 2022. A value of information framework for assessing the trade-offs associated with uncertainty, duration, and cost of chemical toxicity testing. Risk Anal 43:498–515. [PMC free article: PMC10515440] [PubMed: 35460101]
  32. Hanemann WM. 1989. Information and the concept of option value. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 16:23–37.
  33. Howard RA. 1966. Information value theory. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics SSC2:22–26.
  34. Huff J, Jacobson MF, Davis DL. 2008. The limits of two-year bioassay exposure regimens for identifying chemical carcinogens. Environ Health Perspect 116:1439–1442. [PMC free article: PMC2592260] [PubMed: 19057693]
  35. Isaacs KK, Glen WG, Egeghy P, Goldsmith MR, Smith L, Vallero D, et al 2014. SHEDS-HT: an integrated probabilistic exposure model for prioritizing exposures to chemicals with near-field and dietary sources. Environ Sci Technol 48:12750–12759. [PubMed: 25222184]
  36. Kavlock RJ, Bahadori T, Barton-Maclaren TS, Gwinn MR, Rasenberg M, Thomas RS. 2018. Accelerating the Pace of Chemical Risk Assessment. Chem Res Toxicol 31:287–290. [PMC free article: PMC6666390] [PubMed: 29600706]
  37. Krewski D, Gaylor DW, Soms AP, Szyszkowicz M. 1993. An overview of the report: correlation between carcinogenic potency and the maximum tolerated dose: implications for risk assessment. Risk Anal 13:383–398. [PubMed: 8234946]
  38. Krewski D, Westphal M, Andersen ME, Paoli GM, Chiu WA, Al-Zoughool M, et al 2014. A framework for the next generation of risk science. Environ Health Perspect 122:796805. [PMC free article: PMC4123023] [PubMed: 24727499]
  39. Krewski D, Andersen ME, Tyshenko MG, Krishnan K, Hartung T, Boekelheide K, et al 2020. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: progress in the past decade and future perspectives. Arch Toxicol 94:1–58. [PubMed: 31848664]
  40. Krewski D, Saunders-Hastings P, Larkin P, Westphal M, Tyshenko MG, Leiss W, et al 2022. Principles of risk decision-making. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 25:250–278. [PubMed: 35980104]
  41. Lave LB, Omenn GS. 1986. Cost-effectiveness of short-term tests for carcinogenicity. Nature 324:29–34. [PubMed: 3097548]
  42. Lave LB, Ennever FK, Rosenkranz HS, Omenn GS. 1988. Information value of the rodent bioassay. Nature 336:631–633. [PubMed: 3143914]
  43. Leontaridou M, Gabbert S, Van Ierland EC, Worth AP, Landsiedel R. 2016. Evaluation of non-animal methods for assessing skin sensitisation hazard: A Bayesian Value-of-Information analysis. Altern Lab Anim 44:255–269. [PubMed: 27494625]
  44. NASEM. 2009. Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. Washington, DC:National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
  45. NASEM. 2021. The use of Systematic Review in EPA's Toxic Substances Control Act Risk Evaluations. Washington, DC:National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
  46. NASEM. 2022. The Importance of Chemical Research to the U.S. Economy. Washington, DC:National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
  47. NTP. 1996. National Toxicology Program Fiscal Year 1996 Annual Plan. 96-4168. Research Triangle Park, NC:National Toxicology Program.
  48. NTP. 2018. NTP Research Report on National Toxicology Program Approach to Genomic Dose-Response Modeling. NTP-RR-5. Research Triangle Park, NC:National Toxicology Program, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [PubMed: 30321009]
  49. Pastoor T, Stevens J. 2005. Historical perspective of the cancer bioassay. Scand J Work Environ Health 31 Suppl 1:129–140; discussion 119–122. [PubMed: 16190160]
  50. Peng CZ, Hatlestad P, Klug MG, Kerbeshian J, Burd L. 2009. Health care costs and utilization rates for children with pervasive developmental disorders in North Dakota from 1998 to 2004: impact on Medicaid. J Child Neurol 24:140–147. [PubMed: 19182149]
  51. Raiffa H. 1968. Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices under Uncertainty. New York, NY:Random House. [PubMed: 8231747]
  52. Ring CL, Arnot JA, Bennett DH, Egeghy PP, Fantke P, Huang L, et al 2019. Consensus Modeling of Median Chemical Intake for the U.S. Population Based on Predictions of Exposure Pathways. Environ Sci Technol 53:719–732. [PMC free article: PMC6690061] [PubMed: 30516957]
  53. Sand S, Portier CJ, Krewski D. 2011. A signal-to-noise crossover dose as the point of departure for health risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 119:1766–1774. [PMC free article: PMC3261975] [PubMed: 21813365]
  54. Shahat AR S, Greco G. 2021. The Economic Costs of Childhood Disability: A Literature Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18:3531. [PMC free article: PMC8036354] [PubMed: 33805375]
  55. Taylor AC, Evans JS, McKone TE. 1993. The value of animal test information in environmental control decisions. Risk Anal 13:403–412. [PubMed: 8234948]
  56. Thayer KA, Angrish M, Arzuaga X, Carlson LM, Davis A, Dishaw L, et al 2022a. Systematic evidence map (SEM) template: Report format and methods used for the US EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) program, and other "fit for purpose" literature-based human health analyses. Environ Int 169:107468. [PubMed: 36174483]
  57. Thayer KA, Shaffer RM, Angrish M, Arzuaga X, Carlson LM, Davis A, et al 2022b. Use of systematic evidence maps within the US environmental protection agency (EPA) integrated risk information system (IRIS) program: Advancements to date and looking ahead. Environ Int 169:107363. [PubMed: 36057470]
  58. Thomas RS, Allen BC, Nong A, Yang L, Bermudez E, Clewell HJ 3rd, et al 2007. A method to integrate benchmark dose estimates with genomic data to assess the functional effects of chemical exposure. Toxicol Sci 98:240–248. [PubMed: 17449896]
  59. Thompson KM, Evans JS. 1997. The value of improved national exposure information for perchloroethylene (Perc): a case study for dry cleaners. Risk Anal 17:253–271.
  60. Wang Z, Walker GW, Muir DC G, Nagatani-Yoshida K. 2020. Toward a Global Understanding of Chemical Pollution: A First Comprehensive Analysis of National and Regional Chemical Inventories. Environ Sci Technol 54:2575–2584. [PubMed: 31968937]
  61. Whaley P, Aiassa E, Beausoleil C, Beronius A, Bilotta G, Boobis A, et al 2020. Recommendations for the conduct of systematic reviews in toxicology and environmental health research (COSTER). Environ Int 143:105926. [PubMed: 32653802]
  62. WHO. 2017. Guidance document on evaluating and expressing uncertainty in hazard characterization. Harmonization Project Document 11 – 2nd edition. Geneva, Switzerland:World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety.
  63. Yokota F, Gray G, Hammitt JK, Thompson KM. 2004. Tiered chemical testing: a value of information approach. Risk Anal 24:1625–1639. [PubMed: 15660617]
  64. Yokota F, Thompson KM. 2004. Value of information analysis in environmental health risk management decisions: past, present, and future. Risk Anal 24:635–650. [PubMed: 15209935]
  65. Zabeo A, Keisler JM, Hristozov D, Marcomini A, Linkov I. 2019. Value of information analysis for assessing risks and benefits of nanotechnology innovation. Environmental Sciences Europe 31:11.
Copyright Notice
Bookshelf ID: NBK608017
Contents

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (3.1M)

Other titles in this collection

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

ClearTurn OffTurn On

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...