MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194511841 · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2021.111904

Emerging concepts and opportunities for endocrine disruptor screening of the non-EATS modalities

2021· article· en· W3194511841 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher J. Martyniuk, Rubén Martínez, Laia Navarro‐Martín, Jorke H. Kamstra, Adam Schwendt, Stéphane Reynaud, Lorraine E. Chalifour

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsHorizon 2020European CommissionHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeFP7 Coherent Development of Research PoliciesHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsAdverse Outcome PathwayModalitiesEndocrine systemBiologyEndocrine disruptorBioinformaticsComputational biologyHormoneEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are ubiquitous in the environment and involve diverse chemical-receptor interactions that can perturb hormone signaling. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has validated several EDC-receptor bioassays to detect endocrine active chemicals and has established guidelines for regulatory testing of EDCs. Focus on testing over the past decade has been initially directed to EATS modalities (estrogen, androgen, thyroid, and steroidogenesis) and validated tests for chemicals that exert effects through non-EATS modalities are less established. Due to recognition that EDCs are vast in their mechanisms of action, novel bioassays are needed to capture the full scope of activity. Here, we highlight the need for validated assays that detect non-EATS modalities and discuss major international efforts underway to develop such tools for regulatory purposes, focusing on non-EATS modalities of high concern (i.e., retinoic acid, aryl hydrocarbon receptor, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, and glucocorticoid signaling). Two case studies are presented with strong evidence amongst animals and human studies for non-EATS disruption and associations with wildlife and human disease. This includes metabolic syndrome and insulin signaling (case study 1) and chemicals that impact the cardiovascular system (case study 2). This is relevant as obesity and cardiovascular disease represent two of the most significant health-related crises of our time. Lastly, emerging topics related to EDCs are discussed, including recognition of crosstalk between the EATS and non-EATS axis, complex mixtures containing a variety of EDCs, adverse outcome pathways for chemicals acting through non-EATS mechanisms, and novel models for testing chemicals. Recommendations and considerations for evaluating non-EATS modalities are proposed. Moving forward, improved understanding of the non-EATS modalities will lead to integrated testing strategies that can be used in regulatory bodies to protect environmental, animal, and human health from harmful environmental chemicals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ResearchSame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207