2013
DOI: 10.1002/jat.2861
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Blood transcriptomics: applications in toxicology

Abstract: The number of new chemicals that are being synthesized each year has been steadily increasing. While chemicals are of immense benefit to mankind, many of them have a significant negative impact, primarily owing to their inherent chemistry and toxicity, on the environment as well as human health. In addition to chemical exposures, human exposures to numerous non-chemical toxic agents take place in the environment and workplace. Given that human exposure to toxic agents is often unavoidable and many of these age… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, the value of blood-based gene expression profiling resides in the genes, in which expression pattern is distinctively representative of an exposure or a disease. For example, blood-based gene signatures have been shown to reflect different lung pathologies in patients (Showe et al, 2009; Rotunno et al, 2011; Zander et al, 2011; Bloom et al, 2013; DePianto et al, 2014; Huang et al, 2015) and even toxicant exposures (LaBreche et al, 2011; Beineke et al, 2012; Joseph et al, 2013; Bushel et al, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the value of blood-based gene expression profiling resides in the genes, in which expression pattern is distinctively representative of an exposure or a disease. For example, blood-based gene signatures have been shown to reflect different lung pathologies in patients (Showe et al, 2009; Rotunno et al, 2011; Zander et al, 2011; Bloom et al, 2013; DePianto et al, 2014; Huang et al, 2015) and even toxicant exposures (LaBreche et al, 2011; Beineke et al, 2012; Joseph et al, 2013; Bushel et al, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exogenous chemicals (e.g., lead), chemical-derived metabolites, and endogenous molecules produced by primarily exposed organs (e.g., lung, gut) can pass into the blood stream and may induce molecular changes in blood cells [1]. Therefore, investigating whether specific markers in response to chemical exposure can be identified in blood cells may be highly valuable for monitoring chemical exposure [2, 3]. Interestingly, new ‘omics’ technologies (e.g., genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, lipidomics) can be applied to toxicity testing in order to increase efficiency and provide a more data- and system-driven approach to exposure response assessment [3, 4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In liver and pulmonary toxicity studies, gene signatures have been identified successfully in blood showing (i) capability to predict exposure and toxicity to chemicals such as acetaminophen in liver (drug-induced liver injury) or crystalline silica in lung; (ii) superior sensitivity as predictors of toxicity compared with the classical toxicity markers in rats; and (iii) to some extent, similarities in pathways and functions that are perturbed in primary tissue and blood [3]. These findings, in addition to its easy access, make blood highly relevant as a surrogate to identify gene expression-based signatures as specific markers for toxicological evaluation and risk assessment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Increasing sequencing depth and ever-expanding coverage of next generation sequencing technology has made RNA-Seq an attractive approach for the identification of DEG in response to several different stimuli [ 73 , 74 ]. Molecular profiling of circulating blood cells has been associated with physiological, toxicological and pathological events originating from different tissues and organs in the body making it a rich source for potential biomarker identification [ 33 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 ] for the evaluation of treatment responses [ 45 , 80 , 81 ]. Our study consisted of whole blood RNA samples averaging 70M reads.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%