Gradient, 20 University Road, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011 Jun;8(6):2020-73. doi: 10.3390/ijerph8062020. Epub 2011 Jun 8.
Regulatory agencies are under increased pressure to consider broader public health concerns that extend to multiple pollutant exposures, multiple exposure pathways, and vulnerable populations. Specifically, cumulative risk assessment initiatives have stressed the importance of considering both chemical and non-chemical stressors, such as socioeconomic status (SES) and related psychosocial stress, in evaluating health risks. The integration of non-chemical stressors into a cumulative risk assessment framework has been largely driven by evidence of health disparities across different segments of society that may also bear a disproportionate risk from chemical exposures. This review will discuss current efforts to advance the field of cumulative risk assessment, highlighting some of the major challenges, discussed within the construct of the traditional risk assessment paradigm. Additionally, we present a summary of studies of potential interactions between social stressors and air pollutants on health as an example of current research that supports the incorporation of non-chemical stressors into risk assessment. The results from these studies, while suggestive of possible interactions, are mixed and hindered by inconsistent application of social stress indicators. Overall, while there have been significant advances, further developments across all of the risk assessment stages (i.e., hazard identification, exposure assessment, dose-response, and risk characterization) are necessary to provide a scientific basis for regulatory actions and effective community interventions, particularly when considering non-chemical stressors. A better understanding of the biological underpinnings of social stress on disease and implications for chemical-based dose-response relationships is needed. Furthermore, when considering non-chemical stressors, an appropriate metric, or series of metrics, for risk characterization is also needed. Cumulative risk assessment research will benefit from coordination of information from several different scientific disciplines, including, for example, toxicology, epidemiology, nutrition, neurotoxicology, and the social sciences.
监管机构面临越来越大的压力,需要考虑更广泛的公共卫生问题,这些问题不仅涉及多种污染物暴露和多种暴露途径,还涉及弱势群体。具体而言,累积风险评估倡议强调了在评估健康风险时考虑化学和非化学应激因素(如社会经济地位(SES)和相关的心理社会压力)的重要性。将非化学应激因素纳入累积风险评估框架主要是因为有证据表明,社会不同阶层存在健康差异,这些差异可能也会因化学暴露而面临不成比例的风险。本综述将讨论当前推进累积风险评估领域的努力,重点介绍在传统风险评估范式结构内讨论的一些主要挑战。此外,我们还介绍了一些关于社会压力源和空气污染物对健康的潜在相互作用的研究,作为支持将非化学应激因素纳入风险评估的当前研究的一个例子。这些研究的结果虽然表明可能存在相互作用,但结果相互矛盾,并且受到社会压力指标应用不一致的阻碍。总的来说,尽管已经取得了重大进展,但在风险评估的所有阶段(即危害识别、暴露评估、剂量-反应和风险特征描述)都需要进一步发展,为监管行动和有效的社区干预提供科学依据,特别是在考虑非化学应激因素时。需要更好地了解社会压力对疾病的生物学基础及其对基于化学的剂量-反应关系的影响。此外,在考虑非化学应激因素时,还需要确定风险特征的适当指标或一系列指标。累积风险评估研究将受益于协调来自多个不同科学学科的信息,例如毒理学、流行病学、营养学、神经毒理学和社会科学。