Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Jennifer Jinot is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Jennifer Jinot.


Environmental Health Perspectives | 2009

Evidence of autoimmune-related effects of trichloroethylene exposure from studies in mice and humans.

Glinda S. Cooper; Susan L. Makris; Paul J. Nietert; Jennifer Jinot

Objective Our objective was to examine experimental and epidemiologic studies pertaining to immune-related, and specifically autoimmune-related, effects of trichloroethylene (TCE). Data sources and extraction We performed a literature search of PubMed and reviewed bibliographies in identified articles. We then systematically reviewed immune-related data, focusing on clinical and immunologic features and mechanistic studies. Data synthesis Studies conducted in MRL+/+ lupus mice report an accelerated autoimmune response in relation to exposure to TCE or some metabolites. Effects have been reported after 4 weeks of exposure to TCE at doses as low as 0.1 mg/kg/day in drinking water and have included increased antinuclear antibodies and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and decreased secretion of interleukin-4 (IL-4), consistent with an inflammatory response. Autoimmune hepatitis, inflammatory skin lesions, and alopecia have been found after exposures of 32–48 weeks. Recent mechanistic experiments in mice examined oxidative stress and, specifically, effects on lipid-peroxidation–derived aldehydes in TCE-induced autoimmune disease. Two studies in humans reported an increase in IL-2 or IFN-γ and a decrease in IL-4 in relation to occupational or environmental TCE exposure. Occupational exposure to TCE has also been associated with a severe, generalized hypersensitivity skin disorder accompanied by systemic effects, including hepatitis. In three case–control studies of scleroderma with a measure of occupational TCE exposure, the combined odds ratio was 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1–5.4] in men and 1.2 (95% CI, 0.58–2.6) in women. Conclusion The consistency among the studies and the concordance between the studies in mice and humans support an etiologic role of TCE in autoimmune disease. Multisite collaborations and studies of preclinical immune markers are needed to further develop this field of research.


International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health | 2011

Trichloroethylene and Cancer: Systematic and Quantitative Review of Epidemiologic Evidence for Identifying Hazards

Cheryl Siegel Scott; Jennifer Jinot

We conducted a meta-analysis focusing on studies with high potential for trichloroethylene (TCE) exposure to provide quantitative evaluations of the evidence for associations between TCE exposure and kidney, liver, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) cancers. A systematic review documenting essential design features, exposure assessment approaches, statistical analyses, and potential sources of confounding and bias identified twenty-four cohort and case-control studies on TCE and the three cancers of interest with high potential for exposure, including five recently published case-control studies of kidney cancer or NHL. Fixed- and random-effects models were fitted to the data on overall exposure and on the highest exposure group. Sensitivity analyses examined the influence of individual studies and of alternative risk estimate selections. For overall TCE exposure and kidney cancer, the summary relative risk (RRm) estimate from the random effects model was 1.27 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.43), with a higher RRm for the highest exposure groups (1.58, 95% CI: 1.28, 1.96). The RRm estimates were not overly sensitive to alternative risk estimate selections or to removal of an individual study. There was no apparent heterogeneity or publication bias. For NHL, RRm estimates for overall exposure and for the highest exposure group, respectively, were 1.23 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.42) and 1.43 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.82) and, for liver cancer, 1.29 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.56) and 1.28 (95% CI: 0.93, 1.77). Our findings provide strong support for a causal association between TCE exposure and kidney cancer. The support is strong but less robust for NHL, where issues of study heterogeneity, potential publication bias, and weaker exposure-response results contribute uncertainty, and more limited for liver cancer, where only cohort studies with small numbers of cases were available.


Environmental Health Perspectives | 2009

A Reexamination of the PPAR-α Activation Mode of Action as a Basis for Assessing Human Cancer Risks of Environmental Contaminants

Kathryn Z. Guyton; Weihsueh A. Chiu; Thomas F. Bateson; Jennifer Jinot; Cheryl Siegel Scott; Rebecca C. Brown; Jane C. Caldwell

Background Diverse environmental contaminants, including the plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), are hepatocarcinogenic peroxisome proliferators in rodents. Peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor-α (PPAR-α) activation and its sequelae have been proposed to constitute a mode of action (MOA) for hepatocarcinogenesis by such agents as a sole causative factor. Further, based on a hypothesized lower sensitivity of humans to this MOA, prior reviews have concluded that rodent hepatocarcinogenesis by PPAR-α agonists is irrelevant to human carcinogenic risk. Data synthesis Herein, we review recent studies that experimentally challenge the PPAR-α activation MOA hypothesis, providing evidence that DEHP is hepatocarcinogenic in PPAR-α–null mice and that the MOA but not hepatocarcinogenesis is evoked by PPAR-α activation in a transgenic mouse model. We further examine whether relative potency for PPAR-α activation or other steps in the MOA correlates with tumorigenic potency. In addition, for most PPAR-α agonists of environmental concern, available data are insufficient to characterize relative human sensitivity to this rodent MOA or to induction of hepatocarcinogenesis. Conclusions Our review and analyses raise questions about the hypothesized PPAR-α activation MOA as a sole explanation for rodent hepatocarcinogenesis by PPAR-α agonists and therefore its utility as a primary basis for assessing human carcinogenic risk from the diverse compounds that activate PPAR-α. These findings have broad implications for how MOA hypotheses are developed, tested, and applied in human health risk assessment. We discuss alternatives to the current approaches to these key aspects of mechanistic data evaluation.


Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-part B-critical Reviews | 2008

Mode of Action Frameworks: A Critical Analysis

Kathryn Z. Guyton; Stanley Barone; Rebecca C. Brown; Susan Y. Euling; Jennifer Jinot; Susan L. Makris

Mode of action (MOA) information is increasingly being applied in human health risk assessment. The MOA can inform issues such as the relevance of observed effects in laboratory animals to humans, and the variability of response within the human population. Several collaborative groups have developed frameworks for analyzing and utilizing MOA information in human health risk assessment of environmental carcinogens and toxins, including the International Programme on Chemical Safety, International Life Sciences Institute, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. With the goal of identifying gaps and opportunities for progress, we critically evaluate several of these MOA frameworks. Despite continued improvement in incorporating biological data in human health risk assessment, several notable challenges remain. These include articulation of the significant role of scientific judgment in establishing an MOA and its relevance to humans. In addition, binary (yes/no) decisions can inappropriately exclude consideration of data that may nonetheless be informative to the overall assessment of risk. Indeed, the frameworks lack a broad consideration of known causes of human disease and the potential for chemical effects to act additively with these as well as endogenous background processes. No integrated analysis of the impact of multiple MOAs over the same dose range, or of varying MOAs at different life stages, is included. Separate consideration of each MOA and outcome limits understanding of how multiple metabolites, modes, and toxicity pathways contribute to the toxicological profile of the chemical. An extension of the analyses across outcomes with common modes is also needed.


PLOS ONE | 2014

Characterization of changes in gene expression and biochemical pathways at low levels of benzene exposure.

Reuben Thomas; Alan Hubbard; Cliona M. McHale; Luoping Zhang; Stephen M. Rappaport; Qing Lan; Nathaniel Rothman; Roel Vermeulen; Kathryn Z. Guyton; Jennifer Jinot; Babasaheb Sonawane; Martyn T. Smith

Benzene, a ubiquitous environmental pollutant, causes acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Recently, through transcriptome profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), we reported dose-dependent effects of benzene exposure on gene expression and biochemical pathways in 83 workers exposed across four airborne concentration ranges (from <1 ppm to >10 ppm) compared with 42 subjects with non-workplace ambient exposure levels. Here, we further characterize these dose-dependent effects with continuous benzene exposure in all 125 study subjects. We estimated air benzene exposure levels in the 42 environmentally-exposed subjects from their unmetabolized urinary benzene levels. We used a novel non-parametric, data-adaptive model selection method to estimate the change with dose in the expression of each gene. We describe non-parametric approaches to model pathway responses and used these to estimate the dose responses of the AML pathway and 4 other pathways of interest. The response patterns of majority of genes as captured by mean estimates of the first and second principal components of the dose-response for the five pathways and the profiles of 6 AML pathway response-representative genes (identified by clustering) exhibited similar apparent supra-linear responses. Responses at or below 0.1 ppm benzene were observed for altered expression of AML pathway genes and CYP2E1. Together, these data show that benzene alters disease-relevant pathways and genes in a dose-dependent manner, with effects apparent at doses as low as 100 ppb in air. Studies with extensive exposure assessment of subjects exposed in the low-dose range between 10 ppb and 1 ppm are needed to confirm these findings.


Environmental Health Perspectives | 2011

Risk Estimation with Epidemiologic Data When Response Attenuates at High-Exposure Levels

Kyle Steenland; Ryan M. Seals; Mitchel Klein; Jennifer Jinot; Henry D. Kahn

Background In occupational studies, which are commonly used for risk assessment for environmental settings, estimated exposure–response relationships often attenuate at high exposures. Relative risk (RR) models with transformed (e.g., log- or square root–transformed) exposures can provide a good fit to such data, but resulting exposure–response curves that are supralinear in the low-dose region may overestimate low-dose risks. Conversely, a model of untransformed (linear) exposure may underestimate risks attributable to exposures in the low-dose region. Methods We examined several models, seeking simple parametric models that fit attenuating exposure–response data well. We have illustrated the use of both log-linear and linear RR models using cohort study data on breast cancer and exposure to ethylene oxide. Results Linear RR models fit the data better than do corresponding log-linear models. Among linear RR models, linear (untransformed), log-transformed, square root–transformed, linear-exponential, and two-piece linear exposure models all fit the data reasonably well. However, the slopes of the predicted exposure–response relations were very different in the low-exposure range, which resulted in different estimates of the exposure concentration associated with a 1% lifetime excess risk (0.0400, 0.00005, 0.0016, 0.0113, and 0.0100 ppm, respectively). The linear (in exposure) model underestimated the categorical exposure–response in the low-dose region, whereas log-transformed and square root–transformed exposure models overestimated it. Conclusion Although a number of models may fit attenuating data well, models that assume linear or nearly linear exposure–response relations in the low-dose region of interest may be preferred by risk assessors, because they do not depend on the choice of a point of departure for linear low-dose extrapolation and are relatively easy to interpret.


Reproductive Toxicology | 2016

A systematic evaluation of the potential effects of trichloroethylene exposure on cardiac development.

Susan L. Makris; Cheryl Siegel Scott; John F. Fox; Thomas B. Knudsen; Andrew K. Hotchkiss; Xabier Arzuaga; Susan Y. Euling; Christina M. Powers; Jennifer Jinot; Karen A. Hogan; Barbara D. Abbott; E. Sidney Hunter; Michael G. Narotsky

The 2011 EPA trichloroethylene (TCE) IRIS assessment, used developmental cardiac defects from a controversial drinking water study in rats (Johnson et al. [51]), along with several other studies/endpoints to derive reference values. An updated literature search of TCE-related developmental cardiac defects was conducted. Study quality, strengths, and limitations were assessed. A putative adverse outcome pathway (AOP) construct was developed to explore key events for the most commonly observed cardiac dysmorphologies, particularly those involved with epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) of endothelial origin (EndMT); several candidate pathways were identified. A hypothesis-driven weight-of-evidence analysis of epidemiological, toxicological, in vitro, in ovo, and mechanistic/AOP data concluded that TCE has the potential to cause cardiac defects in humans when exposure occurs at sufficient doses during a sensitive window of fetal development. The study by Johnson et al. [51] was reaffirmed as suitable for hazard characterization and reference value derivation, though acknowledging study limitations and uncertainties.


Environmental Health Perspectives | 2013

Scientific Considerations for Evaluating Cancer Bioassays Conducted by the Ramazzini Institute

Jeffrey S. Gift; Jane C. Caldwell; Jennifer Jinot; Marina V. Evans; Ila Cote; John Vandenberg

Background: The Ramazzini Institute (RI) has completed nearly 400 cancer bioassays on > 200 compounds. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and others have suggested that study design and protocol differences between the RI and other laboratories by may contribute to controversy regarding cancer hazard findings, principally findings on lymphoma/leukemia diagnoses. Objective: We aimed to evaluate RI study design, protocol differences, and accuracy of tumor diagnoses for their impact on carcinogenic hazard characterization. Methods: We analyzed the findings from a recent Pathology Working Group (PWG) review of RI procedures and tumor diagnoses, evaluated consistency of RI and other laboratory findings for chemicals identified by the RI as positive for lymphoma/leukemia, and examined evidence for a number of other issues raised regarding RI bioassays. The RI cancer bioassay design and protocols were evaluated in the context of relevant risk assessment guidance from international authorities. Discussion: Although the PWG identified close agreement with RI diagnoses for most tumor types, it did not find close agreement for lymphoma/leukemia of the respiratory tract or for neoplasms of the inner ear and cranium. Here we discuss a) the implications of the PWG findings, particularly lymphoma diagnostic issues; b) differences between RI studies and those from other laboratories that are relevant to evaluating RI cancer bioassays; and c) future work that may help resolve some concerns. Conclusions: We concluded that a) issues related to respiratory tract infections have complicated diagnoses at that site (i.e., lymphoma/leukemia), as well as for neoplasms of the inner ear and cranium, and b) there is consistency and value in RI studies for identification of other chemical-related neoplasia. Citation: Gift JS, Caldwell JC, Jinot J, Evans MV, Cote I, Vandenberg JJ. 2013. Scientific considerations for evaluating cancer bioassays conducted by the Ramazzini Institute. Environ Health Perspect 121:1253–1263; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306661


Environmental Health Perspectives | 2012

Approaches to human health risk assessment based on the signal-to-noise crossover dose.

Weihsueh A. Chiu; Kathryn Z. Guyton; Karen A. Hogan; Jennifer Jinot

We acknowledge the effort of Sand et al. (2011) in striving to develop a transparent, objective procedure for point of departure (POD) estimation, as encouraged by scien-tific review groups (National Research Council 2009). Although additional charac-teri-za-tion of the statistical properties of the signal-to-noise crossover dose (SNCD) may be warranted, the goal of Sand et al. (2011) appears consistent with the intent of the POD to charac-terize “the beginning of extrapolation to lower doses” [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2005]. In this letter we respond to the authors’ illustration of their approach using cancer bio-assay data to develop reference doses (RfDs) that target a 1/1,000 risk through linear extrapolation from the POD by highlighting opportunities to augment their statistically based approach with biological considerations. For most carcinogens, the U.S. EPA develops cancer potency estimates as follows (U.S. EPA 2005). A POD associated with a benchmark response level (BMR) is derived and converted to human-equivalent units (incorporating information about cross-species dose scaling). The BMR is then divided by the human-equivalent POD to obtain a potency estimate, under the assumption that risks extrapolate linearly with doses below the BMR. For Sand et al. (2011), the upper-bound extra risk estimate (UERSNCD) is the BMR associated with the SNCD, but we recom-mend expressing SNCDs in human equivalents before deriving potency estimates. For nonlinear extrapolation resulting in a RfD (which the U.S. EPA uses for non-cancer effects and carcinogens with a threshold mode of action), Sand et al. (2011) chose to linearly extrapolate to a 1/1,000 risk in the test animal, which they considered analogous to applying a 100-fold uncertainty factor to a BMDL10 (lower bound on the benchmark dose corresponding to 10% extra risk). Several aspects of this proposal merit further considera-tion. First, margins of exposure much larger than 100-fold would be typical for cancer. Furthermore, whereas linear extrapo-la-tion involves extrapolation in the same population to a smaller level of effect, the standard uncertainty factor approach involves extrapolation across populations at a fixed level of effect. The alternative we propose separately accounts for these biologically unrelated processes. Motivating our proposal is the need highlighted by Sand et al. (2011) to clearly separate statistical factors supporting the level of effect associated with the POD while also fully incorporating biological considerations. We propose specifying “target” effect levels (TELs) associated with different end points based on biological considerations, independent of data set. The TELs could then be compared with the lowest practical BMR for a given data set—the UERSNCD used by Sand et al. The UERSNCD/TEL ratio is a diagnostic of the extent of extrapolation to the TEL. If UERSNCD ≤ TEL, then the BMD at the TEL does not involve extrapo-la-tion and can serve as the POD. For a UERSNCD > TEL, the greater the ratio, the greater the uncertainty in the BMD at the TEL from extrapo-la-tion below the SNCD. In this case, the SNCD could serve as the POD, and the gap between the UERSNCD and the TEL could be bridged by an additional factor (analo-gous to the LOAEL-to-NOAEL factor) or linear extrapolation. Then, inter-species, intra-species, and any other adjustments for deriving RfDs would be applied as usual. Thus, this approach separately takes into account biological considerations related to the severity of the end point (via the TEL), statistical considerations related to the study data (via the UERSNCD), and adjustments from the test species to sensitive humans (via uncertainty factors or chemical-specific adjustments). In sum, the work of Sand et al. (2011)advances the development of approaches for providing a transparent, objective method to demark where “extrapolation begins.” However, for human health risk assessment, we propose augmenting statistically based approaches so that inter- and intra-species adjustments and biological considerations relating to the end points are explicitly addressed. Although consensus on specifying TELs may be challenging, particularly for precursor or toxico-genomic end points, clearly separating biological and statistical considerations will enhance the transparency and consistency of chemical assessments.


Toxicology Mechanisms and Methods | 2018

Carcinogenicity of ethylene oxide: key findings and scientific issues

Jennifer Jinot; Jason M. Fritz; Suryanarayana V. Vulimiri; Nagalakshmi Keshava

Abstract In support of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed an evaluation of the inhalation carcinogenicity of ethylene oxide (EtO) in December 2016. This article reviews key findings and scientific issues regarding the carcinogenicity of EtO in EPA’s Carcinogenicity Assessment. EPA’s assessment critically reviewed and characterized epidemiologic, laboratory animal, and mechanistic studies pertaining to the human carcinogenicity of EtO, and addressed some key scientific issues such as the analysis of mechanistic data as part of the cancer hazard evaluation and to inform the quantitative risk assessment. The weight of evidence from the epidemiologic, laboratory animal, and mechanistic studies supports a conclusion that EtO is carcinogenic in humans, with the strongest human evidence linking EtO exposure to lymphoid and breast cancers. Analyses of the mechanistic data establish a key role for genotoxicity and mutagenicity in EtO-induced carcinogenicity and reveal little evidence supporting other mode-of-action hypotheses. In conclusion, EtO was found to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation, posing a potential human health hazard for lymphoid and breast cancers.

Collaboration


Dive into the Jennifer Jinot's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Steven Bayard

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Cheryl Siegel Scott

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Susan L. Makris

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kathryn Z. Guyton

International Agency for Research on Cancer

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jane C. Caldwell

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Glinda S. Cooper

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Karen A. Hogan

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Paul J. Nietert

Medical University of South Carolina

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Rebecca C. Brown

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Susan Y. Euling

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge