Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Aug 16;81(7):366-372.
doi: 10.1136/oemed-2023-109277.

Critical reviews of exposure assessment in carcinogenic hazard identification: the IARC Monographs experience

Affiliations
Review

Critical reviews of exposure assessment in carcinogenic hazard identification: the IARC Monographs experience

Daniel R S Middleton et al. Occup Environ Med. .

Abstract

Objectives: To summarise the rationale, workflow and recommendations for the conduct of exposure assessment critiques in key human studies evaluated for International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards.

Methods: Approaches to evaluating exposure assessment quality in human cancer and mechanistic studies were reviewed according to the precepts outlined in the IARC Monographs Preamble, using two agents as case studies. Exposure assessment 'domains', that is, salient aspects of exposure assessment for the agent under evaluation, were selected for review across the key human studies.

Results: The case studies of night shift work (volume 124) and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (volume 130) used a common approach, tailored to the agents' specific exposure scenarios, to evaluate exposure assessment quality. Based on the experiences of IARC Working Groups to date, the implementation of exposure assessment critique requires the need for agent-specific knowledge, consideration of the validity of time-varying exposure metrics related to duration and intensity, and transparent, concise reviews that prioritise the most important strengths and limitations of exposure assessment methods used in human studies.

Conclusions: Exposure assessment has not historically been a fully appreciated component for evaluating the quality of epidemiological studies in cancer hazard identification. Exposure assessment critique in key human cancer and mechanistic studies is now an integral part of IARC Monographs evaluations and its conduct will continue to evolve as new agents are evaluated. The approaches identified here should be considered as a potential framework by others when evaluating the exposure assessment component of epidemiological studies for systematic reviews.

Keywords: Environmental Exposure; Epidemiology; Occupational Health; Toxicology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of a typical workflow of the preparation of an exposure assessment critique for an IARC Monograph. Step 1 is performed by the IARC secretariat and the following steps are carried out by the experts of subgroups 1, 2 and 4 with assistance of the secretariat.

References

    1. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans: Preamble. Lyon, France. 2019. Available at: https://monographs.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Preamble-2019....
    1. Samet JM, Chiu WA, Cogliano V et al. The IARC Monographs: Updated Procedures for Modern and Transparent Evidence Synthesis in Cancer Hazard Identification. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020. Jan 1;112(1):30–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith MT, Guyton KZ, Gibbons CF et al. Key Characteristics of Carcinogens as a Basis for Organizing Data on Mechanisms of Carcinogenesis. Environ Health Perspect. 2016;124(6):713–21. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schubauer-Berigan MK, Richardson DB, Fox MP et al. IARC-NCI workshop on an epidemiological toolkit to assess biases in human cancer studies for hazard identification: beyond the algorithm. Occup Environ Med. 2023. Mar;80(3):119–20. - PubMed
    1. Stevens RG, Hansen J, Costa G et al. Considerations of circadian impact for defining ‘shift work’ in cancer studies: IARC Working Group Report. Occup Environ Med. 2011. Feb;68(2):154–62. - PubMed

MeSH terms