PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Stephen Olin

Publications and source records attributed to Stephen Olin.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Framework for use of toxicity screening tools in context-based decision-making.

One of the principal applications of toxicology data is to inform risk assessments and support risk management decisions that are protective of human health. Ideally, a risk assessor would have available all of the relevant information on (a) the toxicity profile of the agent of interest; (b) its interactions with living systems; and (c) the known or projected exposure scenarios: to whom, how much, by which route(s), and how often. In practice, however, complete information is seldom available. Nonetheless, decisions still must be made. Screening-level assays and tools can provide support for many aspects of the risk assessment process, as long as the limitations of the tools are understood and to the extent that the added uncertainty the tools introduce into the process can be characterized and managed. Use of these tools for decision-making may be an end in itself for risk assessment and decision-making or a preliminary step to more extensive data collection and evaluation before assessments are undertaken or completed and risk management decisions made. This paper describes a framework for the application of screening tools for human health decision-making, although with some modest modification, it could be made applicable to environmental settings as well. The framework consists of problem formulation, development of a screening strategy based on an assessment of critical data needs, and a data analysis phase that employs weight-of-evidence criteria and uncertainty analyses, and leads to context-based decisions. Criteria for determining the appropriate screening tool(s) have been identified. The choice and use of the tool(s) will depend on the question and the level of uncertainty that may be appropriate for the context in which the decision is being made. The framework is iterative, in that users may refine the question(s) as they proceed. Several case studies illustrate how the framework may be used effectively to address specific questions for any endpoint of toxicity.

Animals↗

Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy.

The rapid proliferation of many different engineered nanomaterials (defined as materials designed and produced to have structural features with at least one dimension of 100 nanometers or less) presents a dilemma to regulators regarding hazard identification. The International Life Sciences Institute Research Foundation/Risk Science Institute convened an expert working group to develop a screening strategy for the hazard identification of engineered nanomaterials. The working group report presents the elements of a screening strategy rather than a detailed testing protocol. Based on an evaluation of the limited data currently available, the report presents a broad data gathering strategy applicable to this early stage in the development of a risk assessment process for nanomaterials. Oral, dermal, inhalation, and injection routes of exposure are included recognizing that, depending on use patterns, exposure to nanomaterials may occur by any of these routes. The three key elements of the toxicity screening strategy are: Physicochemical Characteristics, In Vitro Assays (cellular and non-cellular), and In Vivo Assays. There is a strong likelihood that biological activity of nanoparticles will depend on physicochemical parameters not routinely considered in toxicity screening studies. Physicochemical properties that may be important in understanding the toxic effects of test materials include particle size and size distribution, agglomeration state, shape, crystal structure, chemical composition, surface area, surface chemistry, surface charge, and porosity. In vitro techniques allow specific biological and mechanistic pathways to be isolated and tested under controlled conditions, in ways that are not feasible in in vivo tests. Tests are suggested for portal-of-entry toxicity for lungs, skin, and the mucosal membranes, and target organ toxicity for endothelium, blood, spleen, liver, nervous system, heart, and kidney. Non-cellular assessment of nanoparticle durability, protein interactions, complement activation, and pro-oxidant activity is also considered. Tier 1 in vivo assays are proposed for pulmonary, oral, skin and injection exposures, and Tier 2 evaluations for pulmonary exposures are also proposed. Tier 1 evaluations include markers of inflammation, oxidant stress, and cell proliferation in portal-of-entry and selected remote organs and tissues. Tier 2 evaluations for pulmonary exposures could include deposition, translocation, and toxicokinetics and biopersistence studies; effects of multiple exposures; potential effects on the reproductive system, placenta, and fetus; alternative animal models; and mechanistic studies.

Journal Article↗

A framework for assessing risks to children from exposure to environmental agents.

In recent years there has been an increasing focus in environmental risk assessment on children as a potentially susceptible population. There also has been growing recognition of the need for a systematic approach for organizing, evaluating, and incorporating the available data on children's susceptibilities in risk assessments. In this article we present a conceptual framework for assessing risks to children from environmental exposures. The proposed framework builds on the problem formulation-->analysis-->risk characterization paradigm, identifying at each phase the questions and issues of particular importance for characterizing risks to the developing organism (from conception through organ maturation). The framework is presented and discussed from the complementary perspectives of toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics.

Child↗

The use of non-tumor data in cancer risk assessment: reflections on butadiene, vinyl chloride, and benzene.

The estimation and characterization of a cancer risk is grounded in the observation of tumors in humans and/or experimental animals. Increasingly, however, other kinds of data (non-tumor data) are finding application in cancer risk assessment. Metabolism and kinetics, adduct formation, genetic damage, mode of action, and biomarkers of exposure, susceptibility, and effects are examples. While these and other parameters have been studied for many important chemicals over the past 30-40 years, their use in risk assessments is more recent, and new insights and opportunities are continuing to unfold. To provide some perspective on this field, the ILSI Risk Science Institute asked a select working group to characterize the pertinent non-tumor data available for 1,3-butadiene, benzene, and vinyl chloride and to comment on the utility of these data in characterizing cancer risks. This paper presents the findings of that working group and concludes with 15 simple principles for the use of non-tumor data in cancer risk assessment.

Animals↗