Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies01:27

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

1.1K
Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This...
1.1K
Cancer Prevention02:59

Cancer Prevention

6.5K
Several factors can increase the risk of cancer in an individual. About 50% of cancer cases can be prevented by adopting a healthy lifestyle, regular exercise, eating healthy, and following a modest cancer prevention diet. Epidemiological studies have consistently shown that populations with vegetable and fruit-rich diets have reduced the incidence of cancer. On the other hand, populations who have a diet rich in animal fat, red meat, junk food, or high calories are predisposed to cancer.
Some...
6.5K
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity01:25

Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity

2.0K
Mutagenicity and carcinogenicity refer to the ability of drugs to cause genetic defects and induce cancer, respectively. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies agents into four groups based on their carcinogenic potential. Group 1 agents are known human carcinogens; group 2A agents are probably carcinogenic to humans; group 3 agents lack data to support their role in carcinogenesis; and group 4 includes agents for which data support that they are not likely to be...
2.0K
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

596
Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
596
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data01:25

Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data

1.3K
Epidemiological data primarily involves information on specific populations' occurrence, distribution, and determinants of health and diseases. This data is crucial for understanding disease patterns and impacts, aiding public health decision-making and disease prevention strategies. The analysis of epidemiological data employs various statistical methods to interpret health-related data effectively. Here are some commonly used methods:
1.3K
Pharmacogenetic Phenotypes: Alterations in Pharmacokinetics, Drug Targets and Biologic Milieu01:29

Pharmacogenetic Phenotypes: Alterations in Pharmacokinetics, Drug Targets and Biologic Milieu

159
Genetic variations significantly influence drug response through pharmacokinetics, receptor interactions, and biologic milieu modifications. Pharmacokinetic alterations impact drug metabolism and clearance, affecting efficacy and toxicity. Variants in drug-metabolizing enzymes, such as CYP2C9 and CYP2C19, alter drug activation and elimination. For example, CYP2C9 loss-of-function variants require lower warfarin doses to prevent excessive bleeding, while CYP2C19 variants reduce clopidogrel...
159

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Mechanisms and shapes of causal exposure-response functions for asbestos in mesotheliomas and lung cancers.

Environmental research·2023
Same author

Ultrasensitive dose-response for asbestos cancer risk implied by new inflammation-mutation model.

Environmental research·2023
Same author

Development of a novel method for estimating dermal contact with hand-applied cleaning solutions.

Environmental monitoring and assessment·2020
Same author

A toxicogenomic approach for the risk assessment of the food contaminant acetamide.

Toxicology and applied pharmacology·2019
Same author

Inflammation as a Cancer Co-Initiator: New Mechanistic Model Predicts Low/Negligible Risk at Noninflammatory Carcinogen Doses.

Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society·2019
Same author

Reevaluation of Historical Exposures to Ethylene Oxide Among U.S. Sterilization Workers in the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Study Cohort.

International journal of environmental research and public health·2019

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 3, 2026

Long-term Behavioral and Reproductive Consequences of Embryonic Exposure to Low-dose Toxicants
07:08

Long-term Behavioral and Reproductive Consequences of Embryonic Exposure to Low-dose Toxicants

Published on: March 6, 2018

8.1K

Does EPA underestimate cancer risks by ignoring susceptibility differences?

Kenneth T Bogen1

  • 1Exponent Health Sciences, 475 14th Street, Suite 400, Oakland, CA 94612, USA. kbogen@exponent.com.

Risk Analysis : an Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis
|February 6, 2014
PubMed
Summary

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cancer risk assessments may underestimate risks for sensitive individuals. Current EPA methods focus on average risk, not accounting for significant variations in human cancer susceptibility, as highlighted by National Research Council (NRC) reports.

Keywords:
Cancerinterindividual variabilityrisk

More Related Videos

Demonstration of the Sequence Alignment to Predict Across Species Susceptibility Tool for Rapid Assessment of Protein Conservation
16:02

Demonstration of the Sequence Alignment to Predict Across Species Susceptibility Tool for Rapid Assessment of Protein Conservation

Published on: February 10, 2023

3.0K
In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox
05:47

In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox

Published on: August 28, 2019

16.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 3, 2026

Long-term Behavioral and Reproductive Consequences of Embryonic Exposure to Low-dose Toxicants
07:08

Long-term Behavioral and Reproductive Consequences of Embryonic Exposure to Low-dose Toxicants

Published on: March 6, 2018

8.1K
Demonstration of the Sequence Alignment to Predict Across Species Susceptibility Tool for Rapid Assessment of Protein Conservation
16:02

Demonstration of the Sequence Alignment to Predict Across Species Susceptibility Tool for Rapid Assessment of Protein Conservation

Published on: February 10, 2023

3.0K
In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox
05:47

In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox

Published on: August 28, 2019

16.3K

Area of Science:

  • Environmental Health
  • Toxicology
  • Risk Assessment

Background:

  • National Research Council (NRC) reports recommended the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) increase cancer risk estimates due to significant variability in human sensitivity to environmental agents.
  • Concerns exist that EPA's current methodologies systematically underestimate cancer risks for the general population.
  • A ~25-fold difference in cancer sensitivity between median and upper 95th percentile individuals was noted, suggesting a need for revised risk assessment approaches.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the appropriateness of EPA's risk characterization and management policies regarding individual cancer risks from environmental carcinogens.
  • To address the discrepancy between NRC recommendations for increased risk estimates and EPA's continued use of average risk metrics.
  • To clarify how EPA's policies account for broad variability in human cancer susceptibility.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of EPA's risk assessment methodologies in light of NRC recommendations.
  • Review of EPA's risk characterization and management policies concerning environmental chemical carcinogens.
  • Examination of the basis for EPA's point estimates of cancer risk (average vs. median person).

Main Results:

  • EPA's point estimates for cancer risk are based on the average person, not the median person, within modeled exposure groups.
  • This approach does not fully address the broad variability in human cancer susceptibility highlighted by NRC reports.
  • The concern of systematic underestimation due to EPA's methodology is unwarranted if considering average risk, but the clarity on individual risk management remains insufficient.

Conclusions:

  • EPA's risk assessment practices, focusing on average risk, may not adequately capture the full spectrum of individual cancer risks from environmental exposures.
  • Further clarification is needed from the EPA on how its policies address the wide range of human susceptibility to carcinogens.
  • The findings underscore the ongoing challenge of balancing population-level risk assessment with individual variability in response to environmental hazards.