4.4 Article

Relationship between prenatal exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls and birth weight: A systematic analysis of published epidemiological studies through a standardization of biomonitoring data

期刊

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
卷 64, 期 1, 页码 161-176

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.06.007

关键词

PCBs; Birth weight; Exposure standardization; Hill criteria; Biological concentration-response relationship

资金

  1. Health Canada
  2. Chair of Toxicological Risk Assessment and Management of the Universite de Montreal
  3. Fonds de recherche du Quebec-Sante (FRQS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Impact of prenatal PCB exposure on birth weight was investigated in various children cohorts and findings of published studies show inconsistencies. Because a direct comparison of results obtained from different studies remains difficult, the biological concentration-birth weight relationship is not clearly established. The objective of this research was to perform a systematic analysis of published epidemiological data to reassess relationship between prenatal PCB exposure and low birth weight, using toxicokinetic considerations and a novel standardization procedure of biological concentration data across studies. A systematic analysis of 20 epidemiological studies published up to 2011 on this topic was conducted. This was achieved through a standardization of reported exposure data in terms of total PCBs per kg of lipids in maternal plasma. Systematic analysis of the standardized biological concentration-birth weight relationship across studies was then conducted through the application of Hill criteria. Combining results of all 20 reviewed studies did not allow to establish an association between prenatal exposure to PCBs at the described levels and abnormal birth weight (<2500 g). Our approach provides a framework for the use of published data to establish PCB biological concentration-response relationships. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据