Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25736163›Full record

ReviewJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology

Challenges for environmental epidemiology research: are biomarker concentrations altered by kidney function or urine concentration adjustment?

Virginia M Weaver, Dennis J Kotchmar, Jeffrey J Fadrowski, Ellen K Silbergeld

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Biomonitoring of inorganic arsenic species in pregnancy.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Virginia M WeaverDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Dennis J KotchmarNational Center for Environmental Assessment, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Jeffrey J FadrowskiWelch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Ellen K SilbergeldDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USEnvironmental Protection Agency · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomonitoring has become a standard approach for exposure assessment in occupational and environmental epidemiology. The use of biological effect markers to identify early adverse changes in target organs has also become widely adopted. However, the potential for kidney function to affect biomarker levels in the body and the optimal approach to adjustment of biomarker concentrations in spot urine samples for hydration status are two important but underappreciated challenges associated with biomarker use. Several unexpected findings, such as positive associations between urine nephrotoxicant levels and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), have been reported recently in research using biomarkers. These and other findings, discussed herein, suggest an impact of kidney glomerular filtration or tubule processing on biomarker levels. This is more commonly raised in the context of decreased kidney filtration, traditionally referred to as reverse causality; however, recent data suggest that populations with normal kidney filtration may be affected as well. Misclassification bias would result if biomarkers reflect kidney function as well as either exposures or early biological effect outcomes. Furthermore, urine biomarker associations with eGFR that differ markedly by approach used to adjust for urine concentration have been reported. Associations between urine measures commonly used for this adjustment, such as urine creatinine, and specific research outcomes could alter observed biomarker associations with outcomes. Research recommendations to address the potential impact of kidney function and hydration status adjustment on biomarkers are provided, including a range of approaches to study design, exposure and outcome assessment, and adjustment for urine concentration.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersCadmiumChildChild, PreschoolCreatinineEnvironmental MonitoringEpidemiologic StudiesFemaleGlomerular Filtration RateHumansInfantKidney Concentrating AbilityBiomarkersCadmiumCreatinine

Identifiers

PMID25736163
OpenAlexW2019017662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.