Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33395322›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2021

Risk Characterization and Probabilistic Concentration-Response Modeling of Complex Environmental Mixtures Using New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) Data from Organotypic

Nan-Hung Hsieh, Zunwei Chen, Ivan Rusyn, Weihsueh A Chiu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Incorporating new approach methods (NAMs) data in dose-response assessments: The future is now!Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Advancing Toxicity Predictions: A Review onEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Advancing Environmental ToxicologyEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  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.

Nan-Hung HsiehInterdisciplinary Faculty of Toxicology and Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Zunwei ChenInterdisciplinary Faculty of Toxicology and Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Ivan RusynInterdisciplinary Faculty of Toxicology and Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Weihsueh A ChiuInterdisciplinary Faculty of Toxicology and Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.

Funding

Single cell, multi-parametric high throughput platform to classify endocrine disruptor potential of mixturesP42ES027704 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Efstratios Pistikopoulos · 2017 to 2026
$21.2M
Texas A&M Center for Environmental Health Research (TiCER)P30ES029067 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Sakhila Banu · 2019 to 2026
$13.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES029067NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRisk assessment of chemical mixtures or complex substances remains a major methodological challenge due to lack of available hazard or exposure data. Therefore, risk assessors usually infer hazard or risk from data on the subset of constituents with available toxicity values.

objectivesWe evaluated the validity of the widely used traditional mixtures risk assessment paradigms, Independent Action (IA) and Concentration Addition (CA), with new approach methodologies (NAMs) data from human cell-based

methodsA diverse set of 42 chemicals was tested both individually and as mixtures for functional and cytotoxic effects

resultsAll mixtures showed significant bioactivity, even though some were constructed using individual chemical concentrations considered "low" or "safe." Even though CA is much more accurate as a predictor of mixture effects in comparison with IA, with CA-based POD typically within an order of magnitude of the actual mixture, in some cases, the bioactivity of the mixtures appeared to be much greater than that of their components under either additivity assumption. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that CA is a preferred first approximation for predicting mixture toxicity when data for all constituents are available. However, because the accuracy of additivity assumptions varies greatly across phenotypes, we posit that mixtures and complex substances need to be directly tested for their hazard potential. NAMs provide a practical solution that rapidly yields highly informative data for mixtures risk assessment. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7600.

Indexed as

Colony-Forming Units AssayComplex MixturesModels, StatisticalRisk AssessmentBayes TheoremHumansComplex Mixtures

Identifiers

PMID33395322
PMCPMC7781439

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.