APPLICATIONS OF READ-ACROSS FOR A DATA-POOR CHEMICAL

As discussed in Chapters 3 and 5, read-across involves the assessment of a chemical on the basis of its structural similarities to chemicals that have already been tested and takes into account any differences that might influence pharmacokinetics, metabolism, or toxicodynamics. The approach can be coupled with computational and high-throughput data to support or refute the read-across results (see Figure 5-5). Alkylphenols are used as example chemicals for this case study.

Alkylphenols are metabolites or persistent environmental breakdown products of alkylphenol ethoxylates, chemicals that were formerly used in detergents. A few of the more widely used alkylphenols, particularly p-octylphenol and p-nonylphenol, have a rich toxicology dataset. In this case study, p-octylphenol and p-nonylphenol are used as analogues to support the assessment of p-dodecylphenol, a data-poor chemical that has been tested in ToxCast. Both p-octylphenol and p-nonylphenol have weak affinity for estrogen receptors in vitro (Laws et al. 2000). In vivo reproductive-toxicity data on the two chemicals have conflicting results. Multigeneration studies run under good-laboratory-practice (GLP) conditions by National Toxicology Program (NTP) indicate a few effects on reproduction with lowest observed-adverse-effect levels in the oral-intake range of about 30–100 mg/kg-day (p-nonylphenol, Chapin et al. 1999; p-octylphenol, Tyl et al. 1999). Other studies show effects on the reproductive system, although by different routes, such as parenteral injection, or at higher oral doses (see, for example, Hossaini et al. 2003; Mikkilä et al. 2006). Thus, the critical end point for the read-across is reproductive toxicity with estrogenicity as the presumed mechanism.

p-Dodecylphenol is a related chemical on which there are few in vivo toxicity data. The K_OW for p-dodecylphenol is higher than those of the other alkylphenols, but all are very hydrophobic (see Table B-1). The chemical structure of p-dodecylphenol is similar to those of p-octylphenol and p-nonylphenol; the difference is that it has four or three more carbons, respectively, on the alkyl chain. Chemical-similarity scores for straight-chain p-octylphenol or p-nonylphenol are in the range of 55–65%. The chemical similarity score is a measure of molecular similarity that is based on atom-by-atom matching and is a good starting point for molecular comparisons. However, there is no bright-line chemical-similarity score for analogue suitability; it should be considered with other factors, such as physical chemistry and specific molecular features that can dramatically change potential reactivity or biological activity. Wu et al. (2010) provide a series of heuristics for determining the suitability of analogues for read-across. The committee notes that the chemical-similarity scores in Table B-1 suggest that the branched p-nonylphenol might be inappropriate for read-across for p-dodecylphenol. However, it is included here because most models of estrogenicity would consider para-substituted phenol moieties to have a potential to interact with the estrogen-receptor binding site—see, for example, the decision-tree scheme of Wu et al. (2013).

TABLE B-1

Octanol–Water Partition Coefficients (K_OWs) and Chemical Similarity Scores (CSSs) of Selected Alkylphenols.

ToxCast has data on the chemicals in Table B-1. In each case, the most sensitive assay (the assay that has the lowest AC₅₀¹) was one that measured estrogenic activity, and all chemicals were active in several estrogen–response assays at concentrations below 10 μM. Estrogen response (such as binding to the receptor or activation of an estrogen response element) was by far the most prevalent response to all four chemicals in ToxCast. Those results are consistent with the predictions from a qualitative structure–activity relationship (SAR) program developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that classifies all the chemicals as having weak estrogenic activity on the basis of the presence of a para-substituted phenol and the known estrogenic activity of p-alkylphenols as a class. A few other assays had a strong positive concentration response and an AC₅₀ at or below 10 μM (see Table B-2). Activity also included interactions with a retinoid X receptor (RXR) isoform, pregnane X receptor (PXR), a vitamin D receptor, and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ), and mitochondrial toxicity (see Table B-2).

TABLE B-2

Activity in ToxCast Assays for Selected Alkylphenols.

In summary, the SAR and ToxCast data support grouping p-dodecylphenol with the other phenols as chemicals that appear to have a common mechanism, weak estrogenicity. The minor bioactivity observed with the other receptors (RXR, PXR, vitamin D receptor, and PPAR-γ) is not unexpected and emphasizes that the toxicant activity is typically multimodal. Even endogenous hormones that are considered to have high specificity for a particular receptor have comparable nonspecificity (Kelce and Gray 1997), and high-throughput assays provide the basis for evaluating other potential or unsuspected toxicities. The interactions at higher concentrations are probably not involved in toxicity. The overall in vitro potency of p-dodecylphenol as an estrogen appears to be higher by a factor of roughly 15 than that of the p-octyl and p-nonyl analogues, and it was active in 3 times as many estrogen-receptor assays. Because p-dodecylphenol is the most hydrophobic of the alkylphenols, its lower AC₅₀ could be inaccurate (see references and discussion in Chapter 2 on challenges in interpreting in vitro test data), but the data indicate that its estrogenicity in vitro is in the range of the other alkylphenols tested.

Estrogenic responses of p-octylphenol and p-nonylphenol have been reported in numerous studies, including in vivo rat multigeneration studies conducted by NTP (Chapin et al. 1999; Tyl et al. 1999). For the present case study, the no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs)² identified by the two NTP studies could be used as a starting point to derive a reference dose of p-dodecylphenol, although it should be noted that other published studies reported effects at lower doses. The studies were both feeding studies in which a dietary concentration of 200 mg/kg had no reproductive effects. Because the animals' growth and food consumption changed over time, a range of doses (9-36 mg/kg-day) was associated with that concentration. Using the NOAELs as surrogates for p-dodecylphenol could require an adjustment for potency: the lowest AC₅₀ for p-dodecylphenol was about one-twentieth of the lowest AC₅₀ for p-octylphenol and p-nonylphenol, and this could require a comparable revision of the NOAEL.

Several limitations were identified in this read-across exercise. Improved estimations of the AC₅₀ data by using in vitro mass-balance models could be prudent before adjusting the NOAEL. Adjustments of the NOAEL on the basis of possible differences in the pharmacokinetics of the chemicals should also be considered. Differences in logK_OW of 2 orders of magnitude are likely to be important in the rate and extent of absorption and clearance, although in this case the hydrophobicity of all the chemicals is high enough that one would expect high oral absorption of all chemicals. Predicted estimates of absorption and clearance and NOAELs for estrogenic effects could be obtained from targeted testing or similarly focused studies to corroborate the inferences based on read-across. Finally, the uncertainty in read-across should be assessed to ensure consistency and appropriate conservatism (Blackburn and Stuard 2014).

An outcome of this read-across exercise could be classification of p-dodecylphenol as an estrogenic compound potentially more potent than the other alkylphenols. Establishment of a reference dose would be plausible, but additional information on metabolism, absorption, and developmental effects on estrogen-sensitive organs would improve confidence.

AIR-POLLUTION CASE STUDY

There is long-standing concern that exposure to air pollution might lead to chronic health effects, but only in the last several decades have epidemiological studies convincingly linked air-pollution exposure to premature mortality and increased risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer (EPA 2009). Beyond demonstrating hazard, recent studies have refined the characterization of the exposure–response relationship (Beelen et al. 2014). The new evidence reflects the increasing computing power that has enabled refinements in epidemiological methods, especially data-intensive exposure assessment that combines large-scale ambient monitoring of pollutants with advanced geographic information system (GIS) applications, dispersion models, and land-use regression (LUR) models to estimate exposures of large populations. Those methods—and decades of investment in nationwide air-pollution surveillance networks—have allowed researchers to establish long-term exposure models for large prospective cohort studies and to investigate long-term consequences of air pollution, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease, while controlling for major potential confounders. Studies based on those advances—exemplified by recent publications from the European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects (ESCAPE) consortium (Beelen et al. 2014)—have led a working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to conclude that there is “sufficient” evidence to conclude that ambient air pollution is carcinogenic to humans and that the evidence is “sufficient” to conclude that airborne PM is carcinogenic to humans (IARC 2015).

The evidence on the causal relationship of air pollution with lung cancer (IARC 2015) is strong, and hazard identification is not at issue with regard to regulatory decision-making, at least in high-income countries with well-established evidence-based air-quality standards. However, there are a number of unanswered scientific questions concerning air pollution and cancer that are still relevant to regulatory decision-making; for these questions, 21st century science has the potential to reduce uncertainty around key issues relevant to tightening and targeting air-quality regulation. This particular case study illustrates how new and emerging science can be used to address lingering questions about well-defined hazards or data-rich chemicals and considers the following key issues:

• Identifying critical air-pollution sources and components. (1) Air pollution is a mixture that reflects its many sources; its composition varies by time and space. (2) The composition of the pollutant mix is not fully characterized, and research suffers from the “lamp-post syndrome” (that is, it has focused on a few target or indicator pollutants, such as EPA's criteria pollutants, including PM and nitrogen dioxide). (3) There is potential for interaction and synergy among different components of the air pollution mixture with implications for overall mixture toxicity.
• Characterizing the exposure–response relationship. (1) On the basis of available epidemiological evidence, there is no apparent threshold for the long-term effects of air pollution at current levels in the United States and elsewhere, particularly on total mortality and on cancer (Raaschou-Nielsen et al. 2013; Beelen et al. 2014; Hamra et al. 2014). (2) The power to detect effects and characterize risks precisely at low exposures is difficult even in large cohorts, such as the ESCAPE and American Cancer Society cohorts. (3) There are various hypotheses about the possible mechanisms by which air pollution causes long-term adverse effects at current exposures, and the mechanisms are likely to vary by outcome and pollutant mixture. (4) Specific groups might be at greater risk because of particular characteristics, such as genetics, life stage, disease status, or co-exposure to other agents.
• Addressing emerging concerns. There is an expanding list of possible adverse health effects of long-term exposure to air pollution. For example, some evidence indicates possible adverse effects on neurodevelopment in children and decline of cognitive function in adults (Calderon-Garciduenas et al. 2014; Chen et al. 2015).

This case study develops two parallel examples. One is based on lung cancer, and the main concerns are estimating the exposure–response relationship, especially at low exposures, as experienced in the United States and much of Europe and identifying mechanisms involved and key mixture components that might drive cancer risk. The second example, neurodevelopment in children, has been chosen for different reasons. The questions concern mainly hazard identification because causal associations with air pollution for any specific neurodevelopmental outcome are far from well-established. The uncertainties in a number of neurodevelopmental outcomes reflect the challenges in investigating rare but severe outcomes, such as autism, that require large pregnancy cohorts that have detailed air-pollution assessments and the difficulties in comparing results among studies that evaluate a large array of neuropsychological effects and cognitive function at different developmental ages in children exposed to various pollutant mixtures.

Lung Cancer: Characterizing the Exposure–Response Relationship and Identifying Key Mixture Components

Current epidemiological tools are unlikely to offer direct answers to the related problems of characterizing risk precisely at low doses and determining the shape of the exposure–response curve partly because there are limits to the size of cohorts that can be assembled and because exposure-measurement error is unavoidable with the available tools. However, those problems can be addressed with new and emerging approaches and tools described below that help to characterize exposure more precisely and to probe mechanisms more deeply.

External Exposome

One critical issue in characterizing the exposure–response relationship is defining exposures more precisely, particularly at low levels of exposure. New exposure-assessment approaches centered around the concept of the exposome can help to address that issue. As defined in Chapter 1, the term exposome refers to the totality of a person's exposure. It is discussed here because of the emergence of new tools that provide time-integrated measurements of multiple pollutants at the individual level with greater spatial and temporal resolution than could be achieved previously (see Chapter 2). Such measurements potentially will help to characterize the exposure–response relationship better by reducing exposure-measurement error and by providing the needed inputs for measurement-error correction models.

The new exposure approaches contrast sharply with those used in past studies. Originally, epidemiological studies of air pollution relied on exposure classifications that were based on a few measurements in a few locations. Even the well-known Harvard Six Cities Study (Dockery et al. 1993), initiated in 1974, relied on central site measurements in the six selected cities. The wave of time-series studies that began about 3 decades ago fully incorporated the temporal detail of exposure measures but still used monitoring data that were limited spatially, such as central site monitors. Later cohort studies also incorporated more temporally refined measures, such as hourly or daily ambient monitoring station values, but again were spatially limited, often taken at one or a few stations per city. Citywide average exposures during specified periods were then applied to all residents in a design that would now be recognized as ecological or semiecological (that is, population-level assignment of exposure but with individual-level covariate information) (Künzli and Tager 1997). That approach, reflected in the Six Cities Study, ignores within-city variation and implicitly assumes that there is little spatial heterogeneity of air pollutants or that residents moved around cities enough to be similarly exposed to various pollutant sources. Neither assumption is correct in practice. Thus, measurement error was implicit in those studies, which nonetheless found associations with indicators of PM exposure, most likely because it was possible to exploit the high temporal resolution and fluctuations in air pollutants, especially in assessing short-term effects, such as in the time-series studies of mortality.

New tools are being developed to capture spatial variation in effects better (Coker et al. 2015). Early 21st century advances—such as GIS applications, dispersion models, and LUR models—have added a major refinement of capturing spatial variation in exposure assessment. Before those advances, exposures were generally assigned on the basis of residential location, and that practice accounted for some of the within-city variation. Reliance on residential location, however, did not fully capture or integrate exposures from multiple sources on larger geographic scales. For example, in Europe and the United States, investigators used tailored measurements of PM_2.5 in a number of cities with multiple land-use characteristics of each area (traffic, ports, population density, and factories) to predict concentrations at individual addresses with reasonably good performance by using LUR models and sometimes adding a temporal component to the estimates with data from routine ambient monitoring (Raaschou-Nielsen et al. 2013). However, those measurements were affected by measurement error as suggested by comparisons with, for example, personal-exposure monitoring campaigns. The latter are based on the use of backpacks or similar devices containing instruments that measure exposure at the individual level with great temporal and spatial resolution; such campaigns are generally conducted for shorter periods, such as 2–4 weeks, for feasibility. The external exposome measures showed the complexity of capturing the entirety of personal exposure to PM. For example, cooking was shown to be an important source of exposure to ultrafine particles. Such studies added to earlier understanding that personal exposure to air pollution can vary widely in time and space and be driven by specific time–activity patterns, such as time spent at home, in traffic, at work, and in restaurants. Without an understanding of such variation, exposure estimates can be quite inaccurate and bias risk estimates (Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 2015). New personal devices that will measure a large variety of pollutants are under development, as reported in Chapter 2.

However, none of the new sensor technologies is likely to be feasibly implemented (in terms of data handling and security) at the individual level in large cohorts over the extended periods (decades) necessary to investigate risks of chronic disease outcomes. Studies that are sufficiently large and have the detailed exposure information needed to address the key questions related to lung cancer and air pollution are not likely to be undertaken. Crowd sourcing or anonymous data collection using sensors might be a feasible alternative if implemented within existing or new general cohorts. The resulting data would then be used to refine exposure models and estimates associated with participants in such cohorts. Possible limitations of such data-collection methods include sampling bias and measurement error in the devices that might feasibly be deployed (see NRC 2012 for a more detailed discussion of possible limitations). The committee anticipates further refinements of exposure estimates within cohort studies. The refinements might be achieved by including extensive time–activity data in sophisticated spatiotemporally refined pollution models and by controlling measurement error better, which would reduce one major contributor to uncertainty in the burden of lung cancer attributable to air pollution.

New and emerging approaches also will be helpful for addressing the other challenge noted above that is related to characterizing the specific mixture components and the corresponding sources that drive lung-cancer risk. Most evidence on the health effects of PM air pollution from epidemiological studies—for example, on lung cancer—is based on estimated PM mass as the indicator of exposure. But PM is a complex mixture, and particles of different size and compositions might differ in toxicity and carcinogenic potential. Furthermore, PM exists within the broader air-pollution mixture.

New modeling approaches can provide estimates of concentrations of various PM components and characteristics and facilitate the exploration of the relationships between specific PM components and health risk. Recent studies have comprehensively characterized sources of outdoor air pollution and incorporated LUR models for estimating ambient PM₁₀, PM_2.5, and nitrogen dioxide (Raaschou-Nielsen et al. 2016). Models have then been developed for elemental composition (x-ray fluorescence), elemental and organic carbon, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), benzene, and ultrafine particles, which have been studied little because of difficulties in exposure assessment (Chang et al. 2015). Exposure estimation for ultrafine PM is now possible with, for example, an innovative mobile monitoring design that has been shown to be reliable and cost-effective (Hudda et al. 2014).

There are opportunties to use new in vitro and in vivo assays to evaluate and compare toxicity of PM samples. One of the properties of particles likely to reflect toxicity is oxidative potential, a property for which novel assays have been developed that measure the reduction of antioxidants in lung-lining fluid (Kelly and Fussell 2015). By analyzing the spatial and temporal variability of the oxidative potential of PM in filters, one can characterize the determinants of that variation and develop new spatially resolved air-pollution models for oxidative potential (Yang et al. 2015).

The air-pollution models alone, however, provide information only on ambient outdoor-pollutant concentrations and do not incorporate data on locations of members of the population needed for an exposure-assessment approach that would integrate data on various spaces. The models do not specifically take into account indoor exposure sources or indoor exposures to outdoor pollutants that have penetrated indoors. Recent advances in GIS (for example, route modeling) and microenvironmental models (for example, indoor-to-outdoor exposures) have led to the development of more detailed personal-exposure models that can be fed by rich sources of detailed data on population time–activity patterns, which should reflect time spent indoors. Regarding outdoor exposures, many cities hold information on origin and destination travel details from prepaid card systems or survey data on travel. Combined with regional or national surveys on time-use, those data constitute a rich additional source for personalized exposure models. Detailed data on personal and population-wide air-pollution exposures and space–time activity patterns from monitoring campaigns are required to evaluate new exposure models and thus support their use in providing improved exposure estimates for epidemiological studies and risk assessment.

Internal Exposome

The internal exposome can be investigated with two broad approaches: directly with analytical chemistry (as described in Chapter 2) and indirectly with several -omics technologies. Direct measurement focuses on the exogenous chemicals that can be found in internal fluids and measured with great sensitivity given current analytical-chemistry methods. Indirect measurements are based on changes in DNA, RNA, proteins, or metabolites from which exposure to particular exogenous chemicals can be inferred. Genomics, transcriptomics, epigenetics, and proteomics allow only indirect inferences on exposures, and metabolomics and adductomics might allow direct measurements.

The use of -omics technologies described in this appendix allows the study of changes—for example, in blood or urine—that can help to characterize adverse effects of air pollutants, to refine exposure, to identify mechanisms, and to identify groups at risk. Here, the committee describes the potential contributions of the different -omics technologies in relation to the regulatory issues raised above and provides a few examples intended to show the potential of the rapidly developing science. A systematic review on the topic was not possible, given the scope of the relevant literature and the rapid development of this field. See Chapter 1 for definitions of -omics technologies.

Genomics

Carcinogenesis is understood to be a multistep process to which genetic and nongenetic changes contribute (see Smith et al. 2016). For lung cancer and air pollution, information on genetic determinants of risk would be useful for public-health protection. Genomics can be based on the systematic investigation of genetic (inherited) variants that lead to or increase susceptibility to air-pollution–related disease or can be based on the study of somatic mutations induced by air pollution in cells. Concerning inherited susceptibility, several genetic variants (such as GSTM1) have been investigated in the candidate gene era; more recently, variants have been identified thanks to genome-wide association studies (see, for example, Kachuri et al. 2016). The associations of genetic variants with lung cancer are mostly weak, but the findings of some variants associated with lung-cancer risk have identified groups in the population that are potentially more susceptible to carcinogens.

A potentially fruitful approach for identifying susceptible groups is to develop profiles of susceptibility that are based on genetic pathways. For example, Bind et al. (2014) used a pathway-analysis approach to investigate whether gene variants that are associated with such pathways as oxidative stress, endothelial function, and metal processing modified the association of PM exposure and fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, intercellular adhesion molecule-1, or vascular-cell adhesion molecule-1.

Concerning somatic (acquired) mutations, the sequencing of several types of cancer tissues has shown that mutational patterns can reflect environmental mutagens (Nik-Zainal et al. 2015). For example, lung cancer has a mutational pattern that strongly resembles that induced by benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) in in vitro assays that use immortalized mouse embryo fibroblasts (Nik-Zainal et al. 2015). The results revealed that B[a]P induces a characteristic mutation signature: predominantly G→T mutations for B[a]P as opposed to C→T and CC→TT for ultraviolet radiation and A→T for aristolochic acid, a carcinogenic and mutagenic compound. Thus, the study suggests that the carcinogenicity caused by smoking (and possibly air pollution) could be due to the PAH component in smoke (or ambient air). Mechanistically, that information is of great importance.

Genomics could thus prove useful in two ways. First, genetic (inherited) variants that contribute to modulating the cancer risk associated with air-pollution exposure could be identified. Identification of populations at greater (or less) risk would refine understanding of the exposure–response relationship and point to a susceptible population. Second, if a molecular signature in tumor tissue (somatic mutations) were linked specifically to air-pollution exposure, burden could be more effectively quantified and exposure–response models developed for particular phenotypes defined by etiology. The committee notes that substantial research indicates differences in mutational spectra of lung cancers between smokers and never smokers, although markers that are definitive for any specific type of environmental exposure have not yet been identified. Third, even if signatures are not identified, mechanistic insights that support biological plausibility further and perhaps provide insights concerning mixture components could be gained.

Epigenomics

Environmental exposures are able to change epigenetic signatures, for example, the methylation pattern of DNA or chromatin. DNA methylation and the associated repressed or activated transcription of genes might affect carcinogenesis (Vineis et al. 2010). Changes in methylation of the aryl-hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) repressor gene show that methylation can be used as a marker of exposure to smoking (Shenker et al. 2013) and to monitor the effect of cessation of exposure (Guida et al. 2015). Some authors have used AHR repressor methylation as a marker for in utero exposure of the fetus to tobacco-smoke components from maternal smoking (Joubert et al. 2012). Epigenetic markers in cord blood and placental tissue could also be used to detect possible effects of air-pollution exposure on the fetus and might be useful in addressing the question of whether maternal exposure to air pollution leads to developmental effects (Novakovic et al. 2014). And epigenetic markers might provide information on exposure to air pollution and even particular components.

How informative epigenetics is in studying risks of disease or health outcomes depends on whether the markers are permanent, whether they develop during a critical age window, and whether the right tissue can be investigated; methylation markers are tissue-specific. A few studies have investigated the effects of air-pollution exposure on DNA-methylation patterns (see, for example, Baccarelli et al. 2009) and focused on methylation of long interspersed element-1 (LINE-1) and Alu elements as measures of whole-genome methylation in blood cells. LINE-1 and Alu elements are retrotransposons, that is, repetitive and mobile sequences in the genome. LINEs comprise a substantial proportion of the genome, and LINE-1 and Alu methylation correlates with overall cellular levels of DNA methylation. Air pollution was found to alter LINE-1 methylation (Baccarelli et al. 2009; Demetriou et al. 2012).

Epigenetic changes might also be integral to carcinogenesis, perhaps to the same extent as genetic mutations. Fasanelli et al. (2015) showed that the same genes (including the AHR respressor gene) for which methylation changes are associated with smoking predict lung-cancer risk. Similar studies are not available for air pollution and lung cancer.

Given the substantial current emphasis on the epigenome and the environment, the committee anticipates that the utility of epigenetics in risk assessment will be determined over the next decade. Studies that span the life course are in progress, and there is opportunity for marker validation over longer times, although this research would require multiple biological samples from well-characterized large cohorts.

Transcriptomics

Transcriptomics can lead to the identification of perturbations in gene expression relevant to lung carcinogenesis due to environmental exposures, including exposure to air pollution. Thus, transcriptomics is expected to be a key tool in research, for example, for identifying which specific components of an air-pollution mixture are biologically active and might have a role in causing lung cancer. Transcriptomics might also help to reveal interactions of mixture components by showing that the overall effect of a mixture on gene expression is greater than the sum of gene expression of the individual components.

Gene-expression changes have been linked to air-pollution exposures in in vitro and animal experiments. Specifically, exposure to air pollution leads to increased or decreased expression of genes that are relevant to immune or inflammatory actions. Although few observations have been made in humans, Wittkopp et al. (2016) performed an exploratory analysis and tested whether gene expression was associated with air-pollution exposures in a Los Angeles area cohort of elderly subjects who were exposed to PM_2.5 at an average of 10-12 μg/m³. The authors found positive associations of traffic-related pollutants (including nitrogen oxides and PAH content in PM_0.25–2.5 or PM_0.25) with the expression of several candidate genes, particularly Nrf2-mediated genes, which indicated involvement of oxidative stress pathways. A number of genes have been found to be dysregulated by using transcriptomics tools in studying lung cancer (see, for example, Amelung et al. 2010).

Proteomics

As noted in Chapter 1, proteomics refers to the measurement of the whole compartment of proteins in a biological sample with high-throughput techniques. Like transcriptomics, it might be useful in characterizing toxicity of individual air-pollution components, identifying interactions of air-pollution components, and identifying pathways that might be involved in a response to air pollution and possibly related to lung carcinogenesis For example, the association between long-term exposure to air pollution and inflammatory markers was investigated with a proteomic approach (Mostafavi et al. 2015), and immune–inflammatory perturbations were observed at high exposures. Little work has been conducted on the proteome in relationship to air pollution.

Adductomics

DNA and protein adducts have long been measured in relation to air-pollution exposure (Demetriou et al. 2012; Demetriou and Vineis 2015). Specific adducts, such as PAH–DNA adducts, have been measured. Adductomics is a new approach to identifying exposure biomarkers with a systematic, high-throughput search of all potential adducts resulting from external exposures or internally generated compounds. As part of the exposome concept, adductomics typically involves an untargeted investigation that analyzes hydrolysis products of albumin by using mass spectrometry. Electrophilic chemicals or their metabolites that bind to albumin are also likely to bind to DNA. Thus, protein-based adductomics can potentially be used to identify genotoxic, electrophilic components in a mixture. Adductomics might also be helpful in refining exposure–response relationships, including the shape of the exposure–response curve for lung cancer, because the high sensitivity of adductomics reduces misclassification and uncertainty. That research would require repeat samples from prospective cohorts, and one of the pillars of modern epidemiology is the availability of large prospective cohorts with multiple samples that create an opportunity to study the stability of signals. Some of the markers integrate exposures over relatively long periods and would thus be useful for exposure estimation.

Metabolomics

Metabolomics can be performed on plasma, serum, or urine samples by several methods, including high-resolution mass spectrometry coupled to ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography for untargeted analyses. Metabolic features that characterize exposed groups are identified by multivariate statistics with appropriate correction for false discovery rate. Metabolites unique to exposed groups are then identified with more targeted investigations. However, metabolomics data are subject to high intraindividual variability, and many metabolites have short lives, which might limit their utility in estimating longer-term exposures. Annotation is another limiting factor; researchers are unable to characterize features detected with, for example, mass spectrometry without additional chemical analyses. In principle and with likely future technical developments, however, metabolomics could become a useful tool for achieving several goals, as suggested in Table B-3: the identification of specific metabolites related to mixture components and their interactions, better characterization of exposure by linking metabolites to external measurements, and reconstruction of molecular and biochemical pathways, which would contribute to mechanistic knowledge and identification of pathways.

TABLE B-3

Relevant Regulatory Questions and How -Omics Technologies Might Help to Answer Them in the Case of Lung Cancer.

Neurodevelopmental Effects and Particulate Air Pollution: Determining Whether a Causal Relationship Exists

Determining whether there is a causal relationship between neurodevelopmental effects and PM is potentially of great public-health importance. It has long been known that fetuses, infants, and young children are more sensitive than adults to diverse environmental toxicants because of the vulnerability accompanying developmental, growth, and maturation processes (WHO 1986; NRC 1993; Anderson et al. 2000; Perera et al. 2004; Grandjean and Landrigan 2006). One topic of particular concern is neural development. A large body of research has addressed the influences of air pollution on fetal growth, including head circumference (Vrijheid et al. 2011; Stieb et al. 2012; van den Hooven et al. 2012; Backes et al. 2013; Proietti et al. 2013; Smarr et al. 2013). More recently, epidemiologists have become interested in potential effects of PM air pollutants because some combustion components of PM, such as PAHs and their derivatives, have shown neurodevelopmental toxicity in some experimental and small pathology studies (Calderon-Garciduenas et al. 2002; Takeda et al. 2004). In this section, the committee briefly discusses the epidemiological studies that have linked air-pollution exposures to neurodevelopmental effects and offers some suggestions on how ES21 and Tox21 tools and methods could be used to strengthen or improve the epidemiological studies. The committee notes that epidemiological studies that address neuropsychological effects of air pollution have been summarized by Guxens and Sunyer (2012) and Suades-González et al. (2015) and are not discussed here. The section concludes with some general considerations related to developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) and possible approaches for studying DNT.

Epidemiological Evidence of Associations Between Air Pollution and Neurodevelopment in Children

Epidemiological studies have begun to investigate the association between various air pollutants and neurodevelopmental effects in children. The characteristics and designs of the key studies are summarized in Table B-4. Several small cohort studies in the United States, Poland, and China have shown adverse neurodevelopmental effects in children exposed in utero to PAHs (Perera et al. 2006, 2009; Tang et al. 2008, 2014; Edwards et al. 2010; Lovasi et al. 2014). PAH exposure in the studies was measured through short-term (48-hour) personal-exposure measurements during pregnancy or as PAH–DNA adducts in cord blood. The adverse effects reported were decreases in mental function or IQ and motor developmental delays early in childhood, but these effects were not observed consistently at all ages at which the children were examined. An additional cohort study in the United States linked adverse neuro-developmental effects (IQ and attention disorders) in children with increases in children's lifetime exposure to black carbon, which is related to traffic (Suglia et al. 2008; Chiu et al. 2013); however, only in boys was black-carbon exposure associated with attention disorders, and this suggests possible sex-specific vulnerability. A large European study combined six birth cohorts (Guxens et al. 2014) and reported that nitrogen dioxide, but not other air pollutants, was associated with delayed psychomotor development in children 4 years old and younger; no associations with cognitive or language development were seen. In addition, several Asian studies and a Polish study reported associations of different types of air pollutants and exposure periods with various developmental outcomes (see Table B-4 below). Most of the studies were small, tested children at different developmental ages and for different functions or disorders, and measured exposures prenatally or postnatally, focusing on different pollutants and sources. Thus, additional studies are needed to replicate or confirm some of the reported findings before conclusions about associations of air pollution with adverse neurodevelopment outcomes can be drawn from epidemiological data.

TABLE B-4

Study Design of Epidemiological Studies That Have Investigated Neurodevelopmental Effects of Air Pollution.

The limitations of the epidemiological studies might be addressed by ES21 and Tox21 approaches. The following paragraphs summarize the challenges and possible approaches to addressing them.

• Studies testing children's neuropsychological function at different ages are time-consuming and expensive, and researchers have to balance various factors, such as the extent and variety of functional assessments, cohort size, and length of follow-up. Feasibility and costs are major concerns. Those problems are exemplified in the most recent review of epidemiological studies (Suades-González et al. 2015), which still did not identify sufficient data to conduct quantitative meta-analyses because of heterogeneity in the methods used to assess exposures and outcomes. With respect to cognitive and psychomotor development, Suades-González et al. (2015) decided that for only one exposure (PAHs) were there enough high-quality studies available to conclude that there was “sufficient evidence” of an association but not a causal relationship. For other air pollutants, modern exposure assessment and modeling—GIS or dispersion modeling supported by satellite data and ground-level monitoring networks—might facilitate adding comparable air-pollution exposure measures to those completed or current expensive human studies of neurodevelopment (for example, studies using neuroimaging or extensive functional testing). Eventually, the research conducted might provide sufficient sample size, appropriate exposure gradients, and possibly information about source-specific or chemical-specific pollution components to generate results that allow quantitative or causal evaluation of air pollutants and neurodevelopment.
• Key limitations in many DNT studies of air pollution are that they cannot address multiple air-pollutant exposures (mixtures) and most likely can ascertain potential confounders only incompletely, given the limited knowledge of social and cultural determinants of neurodevelopment and the strong association of neurodevelopment with socioeconomic status (SES). GIS could help to disentangle the role of SES by allowing, for example, area-level adjustment for correlates of SES. Computer-resource–intensive multilevel spatial modeling in a Bayesian framework might also allow addressing spatially correlated confounders and pollutant mixtures (Coker et al. 2015, 2016).
• In future studies with smaller samples, it might be possible to use personal air monitoring or biomarker approaches that include new sensor technologies if instruments are small and lightweight and if measurements are less expensive and thus feasible. The new approaches would allow monitoring over extended periods in pregnancy or early life. With the exception of PAH adducts, there are no good biomarkers for toxic PM components. Monitoring only particles does not allow assessment of the toxicity of their components, and particle composition probably depends on the sources that generate the particles. However, combining continuous particle monitoring with repeated collection of relevant biosamples (such as maternal and infant blood, urine, and placenta) would also allow the use of -omics tools to find new exposure biomarkers in human samples and possibly some biomarkers predictive of outcomes (see, for example, Janssen et al. 2015; Saenen et al. 2015). Nontargeted approaches might be useful for identifying new biomarkers.

REFERENCES

• Abid Z, Roy A, Herbstman JB, Ettinger AS. Urinary polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolites and attention/deficit hyperactivity disorder, learning disability, and special education in US children aged 6 to 15. J. Environ. Public Health. 2014;2014:628508. [PMC free article: PMC3929190] [PubMed: 24624143]
• Allen JL, Liu X, Weston D, Prince L, Oberdörster G, Finkelstein NJ, Johnston CJ, Cory-Slechta A. Developmental exposure to concentrated ambient ultrafine particulate matter air pollution in mice results in persistent and sex-dependent behavioral neurotoxicity and glial activation. Toxicol. Sci. 2014;140(1):160–178. [PMC free article: PMC4081635] [PubMed: 24690596]
• Amelung JT, Bührens R, Beshay M, Reymond MA. Key genes in lung cancer translational research: A meta-analysis. Pathobiology. 2010;77(2):53–63. [PubMed: 20332665]
• Anderson LM, Diwan BA, Fear NT, Roman E. Critical windows of exposure for children's health: Cancer in human epidemiological studies and neoplasms in experimental animal models. Environ. Health Perspect. 2000;108(Suppl. 3):573–594. [PMC free article: PMC1637809] [PubMed: 10852857]
• Aschner M, Crofton KM, Levin ED. Emerging high throughput and complementary model screens for neurotoxicology. Neurotoxicol. Teratol. 2010;32(1):1–3. [PMC free article: PMC2818089] [PubMed: 19703556]
• Baccarelli A, Wright RO, Bollati V, Tarantini L, Litonjua AA, Suh HH, Zanobetti A, Sparrow D, Vokonas PS, Schwartz J. Rapid DNA methylation changes after exposure to traffic particles. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2009;179(7):572–578. [PMC free article: PMC2720123] [PubMed: 19136372]
• Backes CH, Nelin T, Gorr MW, Wold LE. Early life exposure to air pollution: How bad is it? Toxicol. Lett. 2013;216(1):47–53. [PMC free article: PMC3527658] [PubMed: 23164674]
• Bal-Price A, Crofton KM, Sachana M, Shafer TJ, Behl M, Forsby A, Hargreaves A, Landesmann B, Lein PJ, Louisse J, Monnet-Tschudi F, Paini A, Rolaki A, Schrattenholz A, Suñol C, van Thriel C, Whelan M, Fritsche E. Putative adverse outcome pathways relevant to neurotoxicity. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2015;45(1):83–91. [PMC free article: PMC5072123] [PubMed: 25605028]
• Beelen R, Raaschou-Nielsen O, Stafoggia M, Andersen ZJ, Weinmayr G, Hoffmann B, Wolf K, Samoli E, Fischer P, Nieuwenhuijsen M, Vineis P, Xun W, Katsouyanni K, Dimakopoulou K, Oudin A, Forsberg B, Modig L, Havulinna AS, Lanki T, Turunen A, Oftedal B, Nystad W, Nafstad P, De Faire U, Pedersen N, Östenson CG, Fratiglioni L, Pennell J, Korek M, Pershagen G, Eriksen KT, Overvad K, Ellermann T, Eeftens M, Peeters PH, Meliefste L, Wang M, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Sugiri D, Krämer U, Heinrich J, de Hoogh L, Key T, Peters A, Hampel R, Concin H, Nagel G, Ineichen A, Schaffner E, Probst-Hensch N, Künzli N, Schindler C, Schikowski T, Adam M, Phuleria H, Vilier A, Clavel-Chapelon F, Declercq C, Grioni S, Krogh V, Tsai M, Ricceri F, Sacerdote C, Galassi C, Migliore E, Ranzi A, Cesaroni G, Badaloni C, Forastiere F, Tamayo I, Amiano P, Dorronsoro M, Katsoulis M, Trichopoulou A, Brunekreef B, Hoek G. Effects of long-term exposure to air pollution on natural-cause mortality: An analysis of 22 European cohorts within the multicentre ESCAPE project. Lancet. 2014;383(9919):785–795. [PubMed: 24332274]
• Bind MA, Coull B, Suh H, Wright R, Baccarelli A, Vokonas P, Schwartz J. A novel genetic score approach using instruments to investigate interactions between pathways and environment: Application to air pollution. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e96000. [PMC free article: PMC3995963] [PubMed: 24755831]
• Blackburn K, Stuard SB. A framework to facilitate consistent characterization of read across uncertainty. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2014;68(3):353–362. [PubMed: 24457134]
• Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Azzarelli B, Acuna H, Garcia R, Gambling TM, Osnaya N, Monroy S, del Rosario Tizapantzi M, Carson JL, Villarreal-Calderon A, Rewcastle B. Air pollution and brain damage. Toxicol. Pathol. 2002;30(3):373–389. [PubMed: 12051555]
• Calderón-Garciduenas L, Torres-Jardón R, Kulesza RJ, Park S, D'Angiulli A. Air pollution and detrimental effects on children's brain. The need for a multidisciplinary approach to the issue complexity and challenges. Front Hum. Neurosci. 2014;8:613. [PMC free article: PMC4129915] [PubMed: 25161617]
• Chang SY, Vizuete W, Valencia A, Naess B, Isakov V, Palma T, Breen M, Arunachalam S. A modeling framework for characterizing near-road air pollutant concentration at community scales. Sci. Total Environ. 2015;538:905–921. [PubMed: 26363146]
• Chapin RE, Delaney J, Wang Y, Lanning L, Davis B, Collins B, Mintz N, Wolfe G. The effects of 4-nonylphenol in rats: A multigeneration reproduction study. Toxicol. Sci. 1999;52(1):80–91. [PubMed: 10568701]
• Chen JC, Wang X, Wellenius GA, Serre ML, Driscoll I, Casanova R, McArdle JJ, Manson JE, Chui HC, Espeland MA. Ambient air pollution and neurotoxicity on brain structure: Evidence from Women's Health Initiative Memory Study. Ann. Neurol. 2015;78(3):466–476. [PMC free article: PMC4546504] [PubMed: 26075655]
• Chiu YH, Bellinger DC, Coull BA, Anderson S, Barber R, Wright RO, Wright RJ. Associations between traffic-related black carbon exposure and attention in a prospective birth cohort of urban children. Environ Health Perspect. 2013;121(7):859–864. [PMC free article: PMC3701996] [PubMed: 23665743]
• Coker E, Ghosh J, Jerrett M, Gomez-Rubio V, Becker-man B, Cockburn M, Liverani S, Su J, Li A, Kile ML, Ritz B, Molitor J. Modeling spatial effects of PM(2.5) on term low birth weight in Los Angeles County. Environ Res. 2015;142:354–364. [PubMed: 26196780]
• Coker E, Liverani S, Ghosh JK, Jerrett M, Becker-man B, Li A, Ritz B, Molitor J. Multi-pollutant exposure profiles associated with term low birth weight in Los Angeles County. Environ. Int. 2016;91:1–13. [PubMed: 26891269]
• Costa LG, Cole TB, Coburn J, Chang YC, Dao K, Roque P. Neurotoxicants are in the air: Convergence of human, animal, and in vitro studies on the effects of air pollution on the brain. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014;2014:736385. [PMC free article: PMC3912642] [PubMed: 24524086]
• Crofton K, Fritsche E, Ylikomi T, Bal-Price A. International Stakeholder NETwork (ISTNET) for creating a developmental neurotoxicity testing (DNT) roadmap for regulatory process. ALTEX. 2014;31(2):223–224. [PubMed: 24794006]
• Demetriou CA, Vineis P. Carcinogenicity of ambient air pollution: Use of biomarkers, lessons learnt and future directions. J. Thorac. Dis. 2015;7(1):67–95. [PMC free article: PMC4311074] [PubMed: 25694819]
• Demetriou CA, Raaschou-Nielsen O, Loft S, Møller P, Vermeulen R, Palli D, Chadeau-Hyam M, Xun WW, Vineis P. Biomarkers of ambient air pollution and lung cancer: A systematic review. Occup. Environ. Med. 2012;69(9):619–627. [PubMed: 22773658]
• Dockery DW, Pope CA III, Xu X, Spengler JD, Ware JH, Fay ME, Ferris BG Jr., Speizer FE. An association between air pollution and mortality in six US cities. N. Engl. J. Med. 1993;329(24):1753–1759. [PubMed: 8179653]
• Edwards SC, Jedrychowski W, Butscher M, Camann D, Kieltyka A, Mroz E, Flak E, Li Z, Wang S, Rauh V, Perera F. Prenatal exposure to airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and children's intelligence at 5 years of age in a prospective cohort study in Poland. Environ. Health Perspect. 2010;118(9):1326–1331. [PMC free article: PMC2944097] [PubMed: 20406721]
• EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final Report). US Environmental Protection Agency; Washington, DC: 2009. [July 25, 2016]. https://cfpub​.epa.gov​/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=216546. EPA/600/R-08/139F.
• EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). Estimation Programs Interface (EPI) Suite for Microsoft^® Windows, Version 4.1. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency; Washington, DC: 2011.
• Fagundes LS, daS. Fleck A, Zanchi AC, Saldiva PH, Rhoden CR. Direct contact with particulate matter increases oxidative stress in different brain structures. Inhal. Toxicol. 2015;27(10):462–467. [PubMed: 26327340]
• Fasanelli F, Baglietto L, Ponzi E, Guida F, Campanella G, Johansson M, Grankvist K, Johansson M, Assumma MB, Naccarati A, Chadeau-Hyam M, Ala U, Faltus C, Kaaks R, Risch A, De Stavola B, Hodge A, Giles GG, Southey MC, Relton CL, Haycock PC, Lund E, Polidoro S, Sandanger TM, Severi G, Vineis P. Hypomethylation of smoking-related genes is associated with future lung cancer in four prospective cohorts. Nat. Commun. 2015;6:10192. [PMC free article: PMC4682166] [PubMed: 26667048]
• Felter SP, Daston GP, Euling SY, Piersma AH, Tassinari MS. Assessment of health risks resulting from early-life exposures: Are current chemical toxicity testing protocols and risk assessment methods adequate? Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2015;45(3):219–244. [PubMed: 25687245]
• Filer D, Patisaul HB, Schug T, Reif D, Thayer K. Test driving ToxCast: Endocrine profiling for 1858 chemicals included in phase II. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 2014;19:145–152. [PMC free article: PMC4297520] [PubMed: 25460227]
• Goodale BC, La Du J, Tilton SC, Sullivan CM, Bisson WH, Waters KM, Tanguay RL. Ligand-specific transcriptional mechanisms underlie aryl hydrocarbon receptor-mediated developmental toxicity of oxygenated PAHs. Toxicol. Sci. 2015;147(2):397–411. [PMC free article: PMC4612346] [PubMed: 26141390]
• Grandjean P, Landrigan PJ. Developmental neurotoxicity of industrial chemicals. Lancet. 2006;368(9553):2167–2178. [PubMed: 17174709]
• Guida F, Sandanger TM, Castagné R, Campanella G, Polidoro S, Palli D, Krogh V, Tumino R, Sacerdote C, Panico S, Severi G, Kyrtopoulos SA, Georgiadis P, Vermeulen RC, Lund E, Vineis P, Chadeau-Hyam M. Dynamics of smoking-induced genome-wide methylation changes with time since smoking. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2015;24(8):2349–2359. [PMC free article: PMC4380075] [PubMed: 25556184]
• Guxens M, Sunyer J. A review of epidemiological studies on neuropsychological effects of air pollution. Swiss Med. Wkly. 2012;141:w13322. [PubMed: 22252905]
• Guxens M, Garcia-Esteban R, Giorgis-Allemand L, Forns J, Badaloni C, Ballester F, Beelen R, Cesaroni G, Chatzi L, de Agostini M, de Nazelle A, Eeftens M, Fernandez MF, Fernández-Somoano A, Forastiere F, Gehring U, Ghassabian A, Heude B, Jaddoe VW, Klümper C, Kogevinas M, Krämer U, Larroque B, Lertxundi A, Lertxuni N, Murcia M, Navel V, Nieuwenhuijsen M, Porta D, Ramos R, Roumeliotaki T, Slama R, Sørensen M, Stephanou EG, Sugiri D, Tardón A, Tiemeier H, Tiesler CM, Verhulst FC, Vrijkotte T, Wilhelm M, Brunekreef B, Pershagen G, Sunyer J. Air pollution during pregnancy and childhood cognitive and psychomotor development: Six European birth cohorts. Epidemiology. 2014;25(5):636–647. [PubMed: 25036432]
• Hamra GB, Guha N, Cohen A, Laden F, Raaschou-Nielsen O, Samet J, Vineis P, Forastiere F, Saldiva P, Yorifuki T, Loomis D. Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014;122(9):906–911. [PMC free article: PMC4154221] [PubMed: 24911630]
• Hawrylycz M, Miller J, Menon V, Feng D, Dolbeare T, Guillozet-Bongaarts AL, Jegga AG, Aronow BJ, Lee C, Bernard A, Glasser MF, Dierker DL, Menche J, Szafer A, Collman F, Grange P, Berman KA, Mihalas S, Yao Z, Stewart L, Barabási A, Schulkin J, Phillips J, Ng L, Dang C, Haynor DR, Jones A, Van Essen DC, Koch C, Lein E. Canonical genetic signatures of the adult human brain. Nat. Neurosci. 2015;18(12):1832–1844. [PMC free article: PMC4700510] [PubMed: 26571460]
• Hossaini A, Dalgaard M, Vinggaard AM, Pakarinen P, Larsen JJ. Male reproductive effects of octylphenol and estradiol in Fischer and Wistar rats. Reprod. Toxicol. 2003;17(5):607–615. [PubMed: 14555199]
• Hudda, Gould NT, Hartin K, Larson TV, Fruin SA. Emissions from an international airport increase particle number concentrations 4-fold at 10 km downwind. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014;48(12):6628–6635. [PMC free article: PMC4215878] [PubMed: 24871496]
• IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). Outdoor Air Pollution. Vol. 109. Lyon: IARC; 2015. [July 25, 2016]. (Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans). http://monographs​.iarc​.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol109/index.php.
• Janssen BG, Byun HM, Gyselaers W, Lefebvre W, Baccarelli AA, Nawrot TS. Placental mitochondrial methylation and exposure to airborne particulate matter in the early life environment: An ENVIRONAGE birth cohort study. Epigenetics. 2015;10(6):536–544. [PMC free article: PMC4623402] [PubMed: 25996590]
• Joubert BR, Håberg SE, Nilsen RM, Wang X, Vollset SE, Murphy SK, Huang Z, Hoyo C, Midttun Ø, Cupul-Uicab LA, Ueland PM, Wu MC, Nystad W, Bell DA, Peddada SD, London SJ. 450K epigenome-wide scan identifies differential DNA methylation in newborns related to maternal smoking during pregnancy. Environ. Health Perspect. 2012;120(10):1425–1431. [PMC free article: PMC3491949] [PubMed: 22851337]
• Kachuri L, Amos CI, McKay JD, Johansson M, Vineis P, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Boutron-Ruault MC, Johansson M, Quirós JR, Sieri S, Travis RC, Weiderpass E, Le Marchand L, Henderson BE, Wilkens L, Goodman G, Chen C, Doherty JA, Christiani DC, Wei Y, Su L, Tworoger S, Zhang X, Kraft P, Zaridze D, Field JK, Marcus MW, Davies MP, Hyde R, Caporaso NE, Landi MT, Severi G, Giles GG, Liu G, McLaughlin JR, Li Y, Xiao X, Fehringer G, Zong X, Denroche RE, Zuzarte PC, McPherson JD, Brennan P, Hung RJ. Fine-mapping of chromosome 5p15.33 based on a targeted deep sequencing and high density genotyping identifies novel lung cancer susceptibility loci. Carcinogenesis. 2016;37(1):96–105. [PMC free article: PMC4715236] [PubMed: 26590902]
• Kelce WR, Gray LE Jr. Endocrine disruptors: Effects on sex steroid hormone receptors and sex development. Kavlock RJ, Daston GP, editors. Vol. 2. Berlin: Springer; 1997. pp. 435–474. (Drug Toxicity in Embryonic Development).
• Kelly FJ, Fussell JC. Linking ambient particulate matter pollution effects with oxidative biology and immune responses. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2015;1340:84–94. [PubMed: 25716617]
• Kim E, Park H, Hong YC, Ha M, Kim Y, Kim BN, Kim Y, Roh YM, Lee BE, Ryu JM, Kim BM, Ha EH. Prenatal exposure to PM_2.5 and NO₂ and children's neurodevelopment from birth to 24 months of age: Mothers and Children's Environmental Health (MOCEH) study. Sci. Total Environ. 2014;481:439–445. [PubMed: 24631606]
• Knecht AL, Goodale BC, Truong L, Simonich MT, Swanson AJ, Matzke MM, Anderson KA, Waters KM, Tanguay RL. Comparative developmental toxicity of environmentally relevant oxygenated PAHs. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2013;271(2):266–275. [PMC free article: PMC3976560] [PubMed: 23684558]
• Künzli N, Tager IB. The semi-individual study in air pollution epidemiology: A valid design as compared to ecologic studies. Environ. Health Perspect. 1997;105(10):1078–1083. [PMC free article: PMC1470382] [PubMed: 9349825]
• Laws SC, Carey SA, Ferrell JM, Bodman GJ, Cooper RL. Estrogenic activity of octylphenol, nonylphenol, bisphenol a and methoxychlor in rats. Toxicol. Sci. 2000;54(1):154–167. [PubMed: 10746942]
• Lin CC, Yang SK, Lin KC, Ho WC, Hsieh WS, Shu BC, Chen PC. Multilevel analysis of air pollution and early childhood neurobehavioral development. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2014;11(7):6827–6841. [PMC free article: PMC4113847] [PubMed: 24992486]
• Liu F, Huang Y, Zhang F, Chen Q, Wu B, Rui W, Zheng JC, Ding W. Macrophages treated with particulate matter PM_2.5 induce selective neurotoxicity through glutaminase-mediated glutamate generation. J. Neurochem. 2015;134(2):315–326. [PMC free article: PMC4709176] [PubMed: 25913161]
• Loke H, Harley V, Lee J. Biological factors underlying sex differences in neurological disorders. Int. J. Biochem. Cell. Biol. 2015;65:139–150. [PubMed: 26028290]
• Lovasi GS, Eldred-Skemp N, Quinn JW, Chang HW, Rauh VA, Rundle A, Orjuela MA, Perera FP. Neighborhood social context and individual polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposures associated with child cognitive test scores. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2014;23(5):785–799. [PMC free article: PMC4075963] [PubMed: 24994947]
• McCallister MM, Li Z, Zhang T, Ramesh A, Clark RS, Maguire M, Hutsell B, Newland MC, Hood DB. Revealing behavioral learning deficit phenotypes subsequent to in utero exposure to benzo(a)pyrene. Toxicol Sci. 2016;149(1):42–54. [PMC free article: PMC5013821] [PubMed: 26420751]
• McPartland J, Dantzker HC, Portier CJ. Building a robust 21st century chemical testing program at the US Environmental Protection Agency: Recommendations for strengthening scientific engagement. Environ. Health Perspect. 2015;123(1):1–5. [PMC free article: PMC4286280] [PubMed: 25343778]
• Mikkilä TF, Toppari J, Paranko J. Effects of neonatal exposure to 4-tert-octylphenol, diethylstilbestrol, and flutamide on steroidogenesis in infantile rat testis. Toxicol. Sci. 2006;91(2):456–466. [PubMed: 16537657]
• Mostafavi N, Vlaanderen J, Chadeau-Hyam M, Beelen R, Modig L, Palli D, Bergdahl IA, Vineis P, Hoek G, Kyrtopoulos SA, Vermeulen R. Inflammatory markers in relation to long-term air pollution. Environ. Int. 2015;81:1–7. [PubMed: 25898227]
• Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Donaire-Gonzalez D, Rivas I, de Castro M, Cirach M, Hoek G, Seto E, Jerrett M, Sunyer J. Variability in and agreement between modeled and personal continuously measured black carbon levels using novel smartphone and sensor technologies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015;49(5):2977–2982. [PubMed: 25621420]
• Nik-Zainal S, Kucab JE, Morganella S, Glodzik D, Alexandrov LB, Arlt VM, Weninger A, Hollstein M, Stratton MR, Phillips DH. The genome as a record of environmental exposure. Mutagenesis. 2015;30(6):763–770. [PMC free article: PMC4637815] [PubMed: 26443852]
• Novakovic B, Ryan J, Pereira N, Boughton B, Craig JM, Saffery R. Postnatal stability, tissue, and time specific effects of AHRR methylation change in response to maternal smoking in pregnancy. Epigenetics. 2014;9(3):377–386. [PMC free article: PMC4053456] [PubMed: 24270552]
• NRC (National Research Council). Pesticides in Diet of Infants and Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1993.
• NRC (National Research Council). Exposure Science in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012. [PubMed: 24901193]
• Perera FP, Tang D, Tu YH, Cruz LA, Borjas M, Bernert T, Whyatt RM. Biomarkers in maternal and newborn blood indicate heightened fetal susceptibility to procarcinogenic DNA damage. Environ. Health Perspect. 2004;112(10):1133–1136. [PMC free article: PMC1247389] [PubMed: 15238289]
• Perera FP, Rauh V, Whyatt RM, Tsai WY, Tang D, Diaz D, Hoepner L, Barr D, Tu YH, Camann D, Kinney P. Effects of prenatal exposure to airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons on neurodevelopment in the first 3 years of life among inner-city children. Environ. Health Perspect. 2006;114(8):1287–1292. [PMC free article: PMC1551985] [PubMed: 16882541]
• Perera FP, Li Z, Whyatt R, Hoepner L, Wang S, Camann D, Rauh V. Prenatal airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure and child IQ at age 5 years. Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):e195–e202. [PMC free article: PMC2864932] [PubMed: 19620194]
• Proietti E, Röösli M, Frey U, Latzin P. Air pollution during pregnancy and neonatal outcome: A review. J. Aerosol. Med. Pulm. Drug Deliv. 2013;26(1):9–23. [PubMed: 22856675]
• Raaschou-Nielsen O, Andersen ZJ, Beelen R, Samoli E, Stafoggia M, Weinmayr G, Hoffman B, Fischer P, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Brunekreef B, Xun WW, Katsouyanni K, Dimakopoulou L, Sommar J, Forsberg B, Modig L, Oudin A, Oftedal B, Schwarze PE, Nafstad P, De Faire U, Pedersen NL, Ostenson CG, Fratiglioni L, Penell J, Korek M, Pershagen G, Eriksen KT, Sørensen M, Tjønneland A, Ellerman T, Eeftens M, Peeters PH, Meliefste K, Wang M, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Key TJ, de Hoogh K, Concin H, Nagel G, Vilier A, Grioni S, Krogh V, Tsai MY, Ricceri F, Sacerdote C, Galassi C, Migliore E, Ranzi A, Cesaroni G, Badaloni C, Forastiere F, Tamayo I, Amiano P, Dorronsoro M, Trichopoulou A, Bamia C, Vineis P, Hoek G. Air pollution and lung cancer incidence in 17 European cohorts: Prospective analyses from the European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects (ESCAPE). Lancet On-col. 2013;14(9):813–822. [PubMed: 23849838]
• Raaschou-Nielsen O, Beelen R, Wang M, Hoek G, Andersen ZJ, Hoffmann B, Stafoggia M, Samoli E, Weinmayr G, Dimakopoulou K, Nieuwenhuijsen M, Xun WW, Fischer P, Eriksen KT, Sørensen M, Tjønneland A, Ricceri F, de Hoogh K, Key T, Eeftens M, Peeters PH, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Meliefste K, Oftedal B, Schwarze PE, Nafstad P, Galassi C, Migliore E, Ranzi A, Cesaroni G, Badaloni C, Forastiere F, Penell J, De Faire U, Korek M, Pedersen N, Östenson CG, Pershagen G, Fratiglioni L, Concin H, Nagel G, Jaensch A, Ineichen A, Naccarati A, Katsoulis M, Trichpoulou A, Keuken M, Jedynska A, Kooter IM, Kukkonen J, Brunekreef B, Sokhi RS, Katsouyanni K, Vineis P. Particulate matter air pollution components and risk for lung cancer. Environ. Int. 2016;87:66–73. [PubMed: 26641521]
• Reif DM, Truong L, Mandrell D, Marvel S, Zhang G, Tanguay RL. High-throughput characterization of chemical-associated embryonic behavioral changes predicts teratogenic outcomes. Arch. Toxicol. 2016;90(6):1459–1470. [PMC free article: PMC4701642] [PubMed: 26126630]
• Reinius B, Jazin E. Prenatal sex differences in the human brain. Mol. Psychiatry. 2009;14(11):987–989. [PubMed: 19851278]
• Saenen ND, Plusquin M, Bijnens E, Janssen BG, Gyselaers W, Cox B, Fierens F, Molenberghs G, Penders J, Vrijens K, De Boever P, Nawrot TS. In utero fine particle air pollution and placental expression of genes in the brain-derived neurotrophic factor signaling pathway: An ENVIRONAGE Birth Cohort Study. Environ Health Perspect. 2015;123(8):834–840. [PMC free article: PMC4529006] [PubMed: 25816123]
• Schitine C, Nogaroli L, Costa MR, Hedin-Pereira C. Astrocyte heterogeneity in the brain: From development to disease. Front. Cell. Neurosci. 2015;9:76. [PMC free article: PMC4367182] [PubMed: 25852472]
• Schwarz JM, Bilbo SD. Sex, glia, and development: Interactions in health and disease. Horm. Behav. 2012;62(3):243–253. [PMC free article: PMC3374064] [PubMed: 22387107]
• Shenker NS, Polidoro S, van Veldhoven K, Sacerdote C, Ricceri F, Birrell MA, Belvisi MG, Brown R, Vineis P, Flanagan JM. Epigenome-wide association study in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Turin) identifies novel genetic loci associated with smoking. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2013;22(5):843–851. [PubMed: 23175441]
• Smarr MM, Vadillo-Ortega F, Castillo-Castrejon M, O'Neill MS. The use of ultrasound measurements in environmental epidemiological studies of air pollution and fetal growth. Curr. Opin. Pediatr. 2013;25(2):240–246. [PMC free article: PMC4345122] [PubMed: 23399571]
• Smith MT, Guyton KZ, Gibbons CF, Fritz JM, Portier CJ, Rusyn I, DeMarini DM, Caldwell JC, Kavlock RJ, Lambert P, Hecht SS, Bucher JR, Stewart BW, Baan R, Cogliano VJ, Straif K. Key characteristics of carcinogens as a basis for organizing data on mechanisms of carcinogenesis. Environ. Health Perspect. 2016;124(6):713–721. [PMC free article: PMC4892922] [PubMed: 26600562]
• Stieb DM, Chen L, Eshoul M, Judek S. Ambient air pollution, birth weight and preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ. Res. 2012;117:100–111. [PubMed: 22726801]
• Suades-González E, Gascon M, Guxens M, Sunyer J. Air pollution and neuropsychological development: A review of the latest evidence. Endocrinology. 2015;156(10):3473–3482. [PMC free article: PMC4588818] [PubMed: 26241071]
• Suglia SF, Gryparis A, Wright RO, Schwartz J, Wright RJ. Association of black carbon with cognition among children in a prospective birth cohort study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2008;167(3):280–286. [PubMed: 18006900]
• Takeda K, Tsukue N, Yoshida S. Endocrine-disrupting activity of chemicals in diesel exhaust and diesel exhaust particles. Environ. Sci. 2004;11(1):33–45. [PubMed: 15746887]
• Tang D, Li T, Liu JJ, Zhou Z, Yuan T, Chen Y, Rauh VA, Xie J, Perera F. Effects of prenatal exposure to coal-burning pollutants on children's development in China. Environ. Health Perspect. 2008;116(5):674–679. [PMC free article: PMC2367664] [PubMed: 18470301]
• Tang D, Li TY, Chow JC, Kulkarni SU, Watson JG, Ho SS, Quan ZY, Qu LR, Perera F. Air pollution effects on fetal and child development: A cohort comparison in China. Environ. Pollut. 2014;185:90–96. [PubMed: 24239591]
• Truong L, Reif D, St. Mary L, Geier M, Truong HD, Tanguay RL. Multidimensional in vivo hazard assessment using zebrafish. Toxicol. Sci. 2014;137(1):212–233. [PMC free article: PMC3871932] [PubMed: 24136191]
• Tyl RW, Myers CB, Marr MC, Brine DR, Fail PA, Seely JC, Van Miller JP. Two-generation reproduction study with para-tert-octylphenol in rats. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 1999;30(2 Pt 1):81–95. [PubMed: 10536104]
• van den Hooven EH, Pierik FH, de Kluizenaar Y, Willemsen SP, Hofman A, van Ratingen SW, Zandveld PY, Mackenbach JP, Steegers EA, Miedema HM, Jaddoe VW. Air pollution exposure during pregnancy, ultrasound measures of fetal growth, and adverse birth outcomes: A prospective cohort study. Environ Health Perspect. 2012;120(1):150–156. [PMC free article: PMC3261932] [PubMed: 22222601]
• Vineis P, Schatzkin A, Potter JD. Models of carcinogenesis: An overview. Carcinogenesis. 2010;31(10):1703–1709. [PMC free article: PMC3025741] [PubMed: 20430846]
• Vineis P, van Veldhoven K, Chadeau-Hyam M, Athersuch TJ. Advancing the application of omicsbased biomarkers in environmental epidemiology. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 2013;54(7):461–467. [PubMed: 23519765]
• Vrijheid M, Martinez D, Manzanares S, Dadvand P, Schembari A, Rankin J, Nieuwenhuijsen M. Ambient air pollution and risk of congenital anomalies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ. Health Perspect. 2011;119(5):598–606. [PMC free article: PMC3094408] [PubMed: 21131253]
• Wang W, Jariyasopit N, Schrlau J, Jia Y, Tao S, Yu TW, Dashwood RH, Zhang W, Wang X, Simonich SL. Concentration and photochemistry of PAHs, NPAHs, and OPAHs and toxicity of PM_2.5 during the Beijing Olympic Games. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011;45(16):6887–6895. [PMC free article: PMC3155004] [PubMed: 21766847]
• WHO (World Health Organization). Principles for Evaluating Health Risks from Chemicals during Infancy and Early Childhood: The Need for a Special Approach. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1986. (Environmental Health Criteria 59).
• Wittkopp S, Staimer N, Tjoa T, Stinchcombe T, Daher N, Schauer JJ, Shafer MM, Sioutas C, Gillen DL, Delfino RJ. Nrf2-related gene expression and exposure to traffic-related air pollution in elderly subjects with cardiovascular disease: An exploratory panel study. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2016;16(2):141–149. [PMC free article: PMC4495007] [PubMed: 25564368]
• Wu S, Blackburn K, Amburgey J, Jaworska J, Federle T. A framework for using structural, reactivity, metabolic and physicochemical similarity to evaluate the suitability of analogs for SAR-based toxicological assessments. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2010;56(1):67–81. [PubMed: 19770017]
• Wu S, Fisher J, Naciff J, Laufersweiler M, Lester C, Daston G, Blackburn K. Framework for identifying chemicals with structural features associated with the potential to act as developmental or reproductive toxicants. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2013;26(12):1840–1861. [PubMed: 24206190]
• Yang CF, Shah NM. Representing sex in the brain, one module at a time. Neuron. 2014;82(2):261–278. [PMC free article: PMC4130170] [PubMed: 24742456]
• Yang A, Wang M, Eeftens M, Beelen R, Dons E, Leseman DL, Brunekreef B, Cassee FR, Janssen NA, Hoek G. Spatial variation and land use regression modeling of the oxidative potential of fine particles. Environ. Health Perspect. 2015;123(11):1187–1192. [PMC free article: PMC4629740] [PubMed: 25840153]
• Yorifuji T, Kashima S, Higa Diez M, Kado Y, Sanada S, Doi H. Prenatal exposure to traffic-related air pollution and child behavioral development milestone delays in Japan. Epidemiology. 2016;27(1):57–65. [PubMed: 26247490]