Skip Navigation



ToxSci Advance Access published online on January 18, 2007
Toxicological Sciences, doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfm005
This Article
Right arrow Advance Access manuscript (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
97/2/241    most recent
kfm005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ritter, L.
Right arrow Articles by Arbuckle, T. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ritter, L.
Right arrow Articles by Arbuckle, T. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published by Oxford University Press 2007.

Can Exposure Characterization Explain Concurrence or Discordance Between Toxicology and Epidemiology?

Leonard Ritter1,* and Tye E. Arbuckle2

1 Department of Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada 2 Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0K9, Canada. Tye_Arbuckle{at}hc-sc.gc.ca

* To whom correspondence should be sent: lritter{at}uoguelph.ca

Received January 4, 2007; accepted January 10, 2007


  Abstract

The importance of reliable exposure assessment, as a key component of the overall risk assessment process, has been well described for some considerable time. Yet, despite this widely accepted tenet, many studies conclude significant adverse health effects, with associated public policy implications, in the absence of adequate or, in some cases, even rudimentary, exposure quantification. Moreover, it appears that epidemiological studies in humans and toxicological studies in experimental animals may both suffer from inadequate exposure assessment. In this review, we discuss the nature and quality of the exposure assessment in both epidemiologic and toxicologic studies using examples from the pesticides and phthalate literature. Each type of study has its strengths and weaknesses in how exposure is assessed and often the strength of one is also a weakness. It would appear that insufficient or incomplete information about differences in exposure assessment could explain, at least in some cases, the differences in outcome between toxicological and epidemiological studies. Research efforts should focus on improving the feasibility of including biomonitoring in both animal and human studies to facilitate comparisons between animal and human models and improve exposure assessment in epidemiologic studies. Animal and human studies should measure the same biomarkers where possible to facilitate human health risk assessment.

Key Words: epidemiology; toxicology; phthalates; pesticides; exposure assessment; risk assessment; biological dose; administered dose.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.