ArticleReviews of environmental contamination and toxicology2025
Biomonitoring Xenobiotics in Human Biospecimens: Challenges, Advances, and the Future of Exposome Characterization.
Article in Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Urinary Metabolomic Alterations Associated with Contrasting Ambient Air Pollution Exposure in Thai Adults: An UntargetedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Xenobiotics, defined as foreign chemical substances not normally produced by or expected to be present in an organism, are pervasive throughout the human body system. While some xenobiotics have known adverse health effects, the impact of many remains unclear, particularly when considering the potential synergistic or additive effects of chemical mixtures. Human biomonitoring, using biospecimens such as blood, urine, placenta, umbilical cord blood, stool, milk, sweat, saliva, tears, teeth, hair, nails, breath, and cerebrospinal fluid, is a common approach to assess xenobiotic exposure. However, these matrices have inherent limitations in accurately measuring the vast array of chemicals constituting the human chemical exposome-the entirety of chemical exposures an individual experiences over time. This comprehensive review critically analyzes the advantages and limitations of both invasive and noninvasive biospecimens used in human biomonitoring. We outline major classes of detectable xenobiotics in these matrices, compare their qualitative and quantitative feasibility, and discuss challenges in using biospecimens to monitor the internal chemical exposome. The review highlights the importance of integrating complementary external monitoring methods alongside biospecimen analysis, given the short half-lives and trace levels of some xenobiotics in accessible biospecimens. We also discuss emerging technologies and methodologies in biomonitoring, including advanced analytical techniques, wearable sensors, and multi-omics approaches. Additionally, we discuss the ethical, legal, and social implications of biomonitoring and external monitoring. By synthesizing current knowledge and identifying research gaps, this review provides a comprehensive overview of xenobiotics in human biospecimens and outlines future directions for better characterizing the human chemical exposome. These insights are crucial for advancing our understanding of xenobiotic exposures and their health impacts, ultimately informing more effective strategies for disease prevention and intervention.
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.