Risk assessment of herbicide mixtures in a large European lake

Lake Geneva is one of the largest European lakes with a surface area of 580 km2. Its catchment area covers 7400 km2, of which approximately 20% is arable land. Monitoring campaigns have been carried out in 2004 and 2005 to determine the contamination of the lake by pesticides. The results highlight the widespread presence of herbicides in water, the measured concentrations for most substances remaining constant in 2004 and 2005. However, for some individual herbicides the concentrations increased drastically (e.g., the herbicide foramsulfuron). We assessed the environmental risk of the herbicides detected in the lake using water quality criteria recently determined for the Swiss environmental protection agency. Furthermore, we assessed the risk of herbicide mixtures, grouped based upon their mode of action. Generally, the risk estimated for all single substances is low, except for some sulfonylurea compounds. For these substances, the measured concentrations are higher than the predicted no-effect concentration. Impact on the flora of the lake can therefore not be excluded. When mixtures of pesticides with similar mode of action are taken into account, the risk remains lower than the mixture water quality criteria for all groups, but can reach as high as one third of this quality criteria. A further step would therefore be to assess the risk of the total pesticide mixture, including similar and dissimilar modes of action

Variability of a peripheral dose among various linac geometries for second cancer risk assessment.

Second cancer risk assessment for radiotherapy is controversial due to the large uncertainties of the dose-response relationship. This could be improved by a better assessment of the peripheral doses to healthy organs in future epidemiological studies. In this framework, we developed a simple Monte Carlo (MC) model of the Siemens Primus 6 MV linac for both open and wedged fields that we then validated with dose profiles measured in a water tank up to 30 cm from the central axis. The differences between the measured and calculated doses were comparable to other more complex MC models and never exceeded 50%. We then compared our simple MC model with the peripheral dose profiles of five different linacs with different collimation systems. We found that the peripheral dose between two linacs could differ up to a factor of 9 for small fields (5 × 5 cm(2)) and up to a factor of 10 for wedged fields. Considering that an uncertainty of 50% in dose estimation could be acceptable in the context of risk assessment, the MC model can be used as a generic model for large open fields (≥10 × 10 cm(2)) only. The uncertainties in peripheral doses should be considered in future epidemiological studies when designing the width of the dose bins to stratify the risk as a function of the dose.

Workgroup report: incorporating in vitro alternative methods for developmental neurotoxicity into international hazard and risk assessment strategies.

This is the report of the first workshop on Incorporating In Vitro Alternative Methods for Developmental Neurotoxicity (DNT) Testing into International Hazard and Risk Assessment Strategies, held in Ispra, Italy, on 19-21 April 2005. The workshop was hosted by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and jointly organized by ECVAM, the European Chemical Industry Council, and the Johns Hopkins University Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing. The primary aim of the workshop was to identify and catalog potential methods that could be used to assess how data from in vitro alternative methods could help to predict and identify DNT hazards. Working groups focused on two different aspects: a) details on the science available in the field of DNT, including discussions on the models available to capture the critical DNT mechanisms and processes, and b) policy and strategy aspects to assess the integration of alternative methods in a regulatory framework. This report summarizes these discussions and details the recommendations and priorities for future work.

High-altitude exposure in patients with cardiovascular disease: risk assessment and practical recommendations.

Because of the development of modern transportation facilities, an ever rising number of individuals including many patients with preexisting diseases visit high-altitude locations (>2500 m). High-altitude exposure triggers a series of physiologic responses intended to maintain an adequate tissue oxygenation. Even in normal subjects, there is enormous interindividual variability in these responses that may be further amplified by environmental factors such as cold temperature, low humidity, exercise, and stress. These adaptive mechanisms, although generally tolerated by most healthy subjects, may induce major problems in patients with preexisting cardiovascular diseases in which the functional reserves are already limited. Preexposure assessment of patients helps to minimize risk and detect contraindications to high-altitude exposure. Moreover, the great variability and nonpredictability of the adaptive response should encourage physicians counseling such patients to adapt a cautionary approach. Here, we will briefly review how high-altitude adjustments may interfere with and aggravate/decompensate preexisting cardiovascular diseases. Moreover, we will provide practical recommendations on how to investigate and counsel patients with cardiovascular disease desiring to travel to high-altitude locations.

Regional deterministic characterization of fracture networks and its application to GIS-based rock fall risk assessment

The study investigates the possibility to incorporate fracture intensity and block geometry as spatially continuous parameters in GIS-based systems. For this purpose, a deterministic method has been implemented to estimate block size (Bloc3D) and joint frequency (COLTOP). In addition to measuring the block size, the Bloc3D Method provides a 3D representation of the shape of individual blocks. These two methods were applied using field measurements (joint set orientation and spacing) performed over a large field area, in the Swiss Alps. This area is characterized by a complex geology, a number of different rock masses and varying degrees of metamorphism. The spatial variability of the parameters was evaluated with regard to lithology and major faults. A model incorporating these measurements and observations into a GIS system to assess the risk associated with rock falls is proposed. The analysis concludes with a discussion on the feasibility of such an application in regularly and irregularly jointed rock masses, with persistent and impersistent discontinuities.

Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: A possible strategy for increasing smoking cessation rates could be to provide smokers who have contact with healthcare systems with feedback on the biomedical or potential future effects of smoking, e.g. measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), lung function, or genetic susceptibility to lung cancer. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of biomedical risk assessment provided in addition to various levels of counselling, as a contributing aid to smoking cessation. SEARCH METHODS: For the most recent update, we searched the Cochrane Collaboration Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in July 2012 for studies added since the last update in 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: a randomized controlled trial design; subjects participating in smoking cessation interventions; interventions based on a biomedical test to increase motivation to quit; control groups receiving all other components of intervention; an outcome of smoking cessation rate at least six months after the start of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two assessors independently conducted data extraction on each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Results were expressed as a relative risk (RR) for smoking cessation with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, a pooled effect was estimated using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 trials using a variety of biomedical tests. Two pairs of trials had sufficiently similar recruitment, setting and interventions to calculate a pooled effect; there was no evidence that carbon monoxide (CO) measurement in primary care (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32) or spirometry in primary care (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.81) increased cessation rates. We did not pool the other 11 trials due to the presence of substantial clinical heterogeneity. Of the remaining 11 trials, two trials detected statistically significant benefits: one trial in primary care detected a significant benefit of lung age feedback after spirometry (RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.62) and one trial that used ultrasonography of carotid and femoral arteries and photographs of plaques detected a benefit (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.41) but enrolled a population of light smokers and was judged to be at unclear risk of bias in two domains. Nine further trials did not detect significant effects. One of these tested CO feedback alone and CO combined with genetic susceptibility as two different interventions; none of the three possible comparisons detected significant effects. One trial used CO measurement, one used ultrasonography of carotid arteries and two tested for genetic markers. The four remaining trials used a combination of CO and spirometry feedback in different settings. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence about the effects of most types of biomedical tests for risk assessment on smoking cessation. Of the fifteen included studies, only two detected a significant effect of the intervention. Spirometry combined with an interpretation of the results in terms of 'lung age' had a significant effect in a single good quality trial but the evidence is not optimal. A trial of carotid plaque screening using ultrasound also detected a significant effect, but a second larger study of a similar feedback mechanism did not detect evidence of an effect. Only two pairs of studies were similar enough in terms of recruitment, setting, and intervention to allow meta-analyses; neither of these found evidence of an effect. Mixed quality evidence does not support the hypothesis that other types of biomedical risk assessment increase smoking cessation in comparison to standard treatment. There is insufficient evidence with which to evaluate the hypothesis that multiple types of assessment are more effective than single forms of assessment.

Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: A possible strategy for increasing smoking cessation rates could be to provide smokers who have contact with healthcare systems with feedback on the biomedical or potential future effects of smoking, e.g. measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), lung function, or genetic susceptibility to lung cancer. We reviewed systematically data on smoking cessation rates from controlled trials that used biomedical risk assessment and feedback. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of biomedical risk assessment provided in addition to various levels of counselling, as a contributing aid to smoking cessation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We systematically searched he Cochrane Collaboration Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004), and EMBASE (1980 to 2004). We combined methodological terms with terms related to smoking cessation counselling and biomedical measurements. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: a randomized controlled trial design; subjects participating in smoking cessation interventions; interventions based on a biomedical test to increase motivation to quit; control groups receiving all other components of intervention; an outcome of smoking cessation rate at least six months after the start of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two assessors independently conducted data extraction on each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus. MAIN RESULTS: From 4049 retrieved references, we selected 170 for full text assessment. We retained eight trials for data extraction and analysis. One of the eight used CO alone and CO + Genetic Susceptibility as two different intervention groups, giving rise to three possible comparisons. Three of the trials isolated the effect of exhaled CO on smoking cessation rates resulting in the following odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI): 0.73 (0.38 to 1.39), 0.93 (0.62 to 1.41), and 1.18 (0.84 to 1.64). Combining CO measurement with genetic susceptibility gave an OR of 0.58 (0.29 to 1.19). Exhaled CO measurement and spirometry were used together in three trials, resulting in the following ORs (95% CI): 0.6 (0.25 to 1.46), 2.45 (0.73 to 8.25), and 3.50 (0.88 to 13.92). Spirometry results alone were used in one other trial with an OR of 1.21 (0.60 to 2.42).Two trials used other motivational feedback measures, with an OR of 0.80 (0.39 to 1.65) for genetic susceptibility to lung cancer alone, and 3.15 (1.06 to 9.31) for ultrasonography of carotid and femoral arteries performed in light smokers (average 10 to 12 cigarettes a day). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to the scarcity of evidence of sufficient quality, we can make no definitive statements about the effectiveness of biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation. Current evidence of lower quality does not however support the hypothesis that biomedical risk assessment increases smoking cessation in comparison with standard treatment. Only two studies were similar enough in term of recruitment, setting, and intervention to allow pooling of data and meta-analysis.