MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376871529 · doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfad044

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in mixtures show additive effects on transcriptomic points of departure in human liver spheroids

2023· article· en· W4376871529 on OpenAlexafffund
Gregory C. Addicks, Andrea Rowan‐Carroll, Anthony Reardon, Karen Leingartner, Andrew Williams, Matthew J. Meier, Ivy D. Moffat, Richard Carrier, Luigi Lorusso, Barbara A. Wetmore, Carole L. Yauk, Ella Atlas

Bibliographic record

VenueToxicological Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaHealth Canada
FundersHealth CanadaCanada Research ChairsU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsPotencyTranscriptomeChemistryIn vitroEnvironmental chemistryComputational biologyGene expressionToxicologyGeneBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a wide range of chemicals that are used in a variety of consumer and industrial products leading to direct human exposure. Many PFAS are chemically nonreactive and persistent in the environment, resulting in additional exposure from water, soil, and dietary intake. While some PFAS have documented negative health effects, data on simultaneous exposures to multiple PFAS (PFAS mixtures) are inadequate for making informed decisions for risk assessment. The current study leverages data from previous work in our group using Templated Oligo-Sequencing (TempO-Seq) for high-throughput transcriptomic analysis of PFAS-exposed primary human liver cell spheroids; herein, we determine the transcriptomic potency of PFAS in mixtures. Gene expression data from single PFAS and mixture exposures of liver cell spheroids were subject to benchmark concentration (BMC) analysis. We used the 25th lowest gene BMC as the point of departure to compare the potencies of single PFAS to PFAS mixtures of varying complexity and composition. Specifically, the empirical potency of 8 PFAS mixtures were compared to predicted mixture potencies calculated using the principal of concentration addition (ie, dose addition) in which mixture component potencies are summed by proportion to predict mixture potency. In this study, for most mixtures, empirical mixture potencies were comparable to potencies calculated through concentration addition. This work supports that the effects of PFAS mixtures on gene expression largely follow the concentration addition predicted response and suggests that effects of these individual PFAS in mixtures are not strongly synergistic or antagonistic.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations51
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxicological SciencesSame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207