Prioritizing Environmental Chemicals for Obesity and Diabetes Outcomes Research: A Screening Approach Using ToxCast™ High-Throughput Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetes and obesity are major threats to public health in the United States and abroad. Understanding the role that chemicals in our environment play in the development of these conditions is an emerging issue in environmental health, although identifying and prioritizing chemicals for testing beyond those already implicated in the literature is challenging. This review is intended to help researchers generate hypotheses about chemicals that may contribute to diabetes and to obesity-related health outcomes by summarizing relevant findings from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ToxCast™ high-throughput screening (HTS) program. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to develop new hypotheses around environmental chemicals of potential interest for diabetes- or obesity-related outcomes using high-throughput screening data. METHODS: We identified ToxCast™ assay targets relevant to several biological processes related to diabetes and obesity (insulin sensitivity in peripheral tissue, pancreatic islet and β cell function, adipocyte differentiation, and feeding behavior) and presented chemical screening data against those assay targets to identify chemicals of potential interest. DISCUSSION: The results of this screening-level analysis suggest that the spectrum of environmental chemicals to consider in research related to diabetes and obesity is much broader than indicated by research papers and reviews published in the peer-reviewed literature. Testing hypotheses based on ToxCast™ data will also help assess the predictive utility of this HTS platform. CONCLUSIONS: More research is required to put these screening-level analyses into context, but the information presented in this review should facilitate the development of new hypotheses. CITATION: Auerbach S, Filer D, Reif D, Walker V, Holloway AC, Schlezinger J, Srinivasan S, Svoboda D, Judson R, Bucher JR, Thayer KA. 2016. Prioritizing environmental chemicals for obesity and diabetes outcomes research: a screening approach using ToxCast™ high-throughput data. Environ Health Perspect 124:1141-1154; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510456.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".