Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36435938›Full record

ReviewJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2022

The chemical landscape of high-throughput new approach methodologies for exposure.

Kristin K Isaacs, Peter Egeghy, Kathie L Dionisio, Katherine A Phillips, Angelika Zidek, Caroline Ring, Jon R Sobus, Elin M Ulrich, Barbara A Wetmore, Antony J Williams and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Advances in ecotoxicological research using planarians: a comprehensive review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Six principles of exposure science: inspiring solutions that foster healthy environments.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

11 authors.

Kristin K IsaacsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. Isaacs.kristin@epa.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9547-1654
Peter EgeghyCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Kathie L DionisioCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Katherine A PhillipsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Angelika ZidekHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Caroline RingCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Jon R SobusCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Elin M UlrichCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Barbara A WetmoreCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Antony J WilliamsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
John F WambaughCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid characterization of risk to humans and ecosystems from exogenous chemicals requires information on both hazard and exposure. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ToxCast program and the interagency Tox21 initiative have screened thousands of chemicals in various high-throughput (HT) assay systems for in vitro bioactivity. EPA's ExpoCast program is developing complementary HT methods for characterizing the human and ecological exposures necessary to interpret HT hazard data in a real-world risk context. These new approach methodologies (NAMs) for exposure include computational and analytical tools for characterizing multiple components of the complex pathways chemicals take from their source to human and ecological receptors. Here, we analyze the landscape of exposure NAMs developed in ExpoCast in the context of various chemical lists of scientific and regulatory interest, including the ToxCast and Tox21 libraries and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) inventory. We examine the landscape of traditional and exposure NAM data covering chemical use, emission, environmental fate, toxicokinetics, and ultimately external and internal exposure. We consider new chemical descriptors, machine learning models that draw inferences from existing data, high-throughput exposure models, statistical frameworks that integrate multiple model predictions, and non-targeted analytical screening methods that generate new HT monitoring information. We demonstrate that exposure NAMs drastically improve the coverage of the chemical landscape compared to traditional approaches and recommend a set of research activities to further expand the development of HT exposure data for application to risk characterization. Continuing to develop exposure NAMs to fill priority data gaps identified here will improve the availability and defensibility of risk-based metrics for use in chemical prioritization and screening. IMPACT: This analysis describes the current state of exposure assessment-based new approach methodologies across varied chemical landscapes and provides recommendations for filling key data gaps.

Indexed as

EcosystemHumansUnited StatesExposure Modeling, New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), Chemicals in Products, Biomonitoring, Empirical/Statistical Models

Identifiers

PMID36435938
PMCPMC9882966

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.