ReviewRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2019
Peak Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies and Cancer Risks: Considerations for Regulatory Risk Assessment.
Review in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The importance of evaluating specific myeloid malignancies in epidemiological studies of environmental carcinogens.BMC cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Association between butadiene exposure and leukemia mortality in synthetic rubber industry workers.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2026Article
- Real-Time Assessment of Black Carbon Peaks Among Workers Exposed to Diesel Engine Exhaust Emissions.Safety and health at work · 2026Article
- Assessing Social Determinants of Health in Transplantation and CAR-T Recipients: Expert Panel Recommendations from the Survivorship Special Interest Group of ASTCT.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2025Review
- Exposure to soluble platinum salts in precious metal refinery workers over a 17-year period.Annals of work exposures and health · 2023Article
- Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) Exposure Hazard Assessment: An Algorithm for Generating Exposure Index Based on Direct Instrument Readings.Annals of work exposures and health · 2022Article
- Mortality in Yusho patients exposed to polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated dibenzofurans: a 50-year retrospective cohort study.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2020Article
- Peak Inhalation Exposure Metrics Used in Occupational Epidemiologic and Exposure Studies.Frontiers in public health · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We review approaches for characterizing "peak" exposures in epidemiologic studies and methods for incorporating peak exposure metrics in dose-response assessments that contribute to risk assessment. The focus was on potential etiologic relations between environmental chemical exposures and cancer risks. We searched the epidemiologic literature on environmental chemicals classified as carcinogens in which cancer risks were described in relation to "peak" exposures. These articles were evaluated to identify some of the challenges associated with defining and describing cancer risks in relation to peak exposures. We found that definitions of peak exposure varied considerably across studies. Of nine chemical agents included in our review of peak exposure, six had epidemiologic data used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) in dose-response assessments to derive inhalation unit risk values. These were benzene, formaldehyde, styrene, trichloroethylene, acrylonitrile, and ethylene oxide. All derived unit risks relied on cumulative exposure for dose-response estimation and none, to our knowledge, considered peak exposure metrics. This is not surprising, given the historical linear no-threshold default model (generally based on cumulative exposure) used in regulatory risk assessments. With newly proposed US EPA rule language, fuller consideration of alternative exposure and dose-response metrics will be supported. "Peak" exposure has not been consistently defined and rarely has been evaluated in epidemiologic studies of cancer risks. We recommend developing uniform definitions of "peak" exposure to facilitate fuller evaluation of dose response for environmental chemicals and cancer risks, especially where mechanistic understanding indicates that the dose response is unlikely linear and that short-term high-intensity exposures increase risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.