Encyclopedia of Cancer

Living Edition
| Editors: Manfred Schwab

Biomonitoring

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27841-9_643-2

Synonyms

Definition

Biological monitoring (i.e., biomonitoring) has conventionally been defined as “the periodic measurement of xenobiotic(s) or their metabolite(s) in accessible biological media for the comparison with an appropriate reference.” At present, a broader definition could be used that included effect biomarkers and biologically relevant dose, as well as biomarkers of susceptibility.

Characteristics

Biomonitoring is mainly aimed at:
  • Defining the existence of an occupational or environmental exposure

  • Quantifying the internal dose

  • Verifying that exposure limits are respected

The most commonly used matrices for biomonitoring are blood (and its components, e.g., serum and plasma) and urine.

Biological monitoring is complementary to the two other monitoring programs that are carried out to evaluate the health risk associated with exposure to pollutants, i.e., ambient monitoring and health surveillance. The basis of these monitoring programs is defined by...

Keywords

Biological Monitoring Chromosomal Damage Internal Dose Aryl Hydrocarbon Hydroxylase Ambient Monitoring 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Bonassi S, Znaor A, Ceppi M et al (2007) An increased micronucleus frequency in peripheral blood lymphocytes predicts the risk of cancer in humans. Carcinogenesis 28:625–631CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Hirvonen A (2005) Gene-environment interaction and biological monitoring of environmental exposures. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 207:329–335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Hirvonen A, Pelkonen O (2001) Measurement of drug metabolizing enzyme polymorphisms as indicators of susceptibility. In: Aitio A, Hayashi Y (eds) Biomarkers in risk assessment: validity and validation, Environmental health criteria, 222. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp 146–201Google Scholar
  4. National Research Council (NRC) (1987) Biological markers in environmental health research. Environ Health Perspect 74:3–9Google Scholar
  5. Shatzkin A, Freedman LS, Dorgan J (1997) Using and interpreting surrogate end-points in cancer research. In: Toniolo P, Boffetta P, Shuker DEG, Rothman N, Hulka B, Pearce N (eds) Application of biomarkers in cancer epidemiology. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, pp 265–271Google Scholar
  6. Van Damme K, Casteleyn L (2003) Current scientific, ethical and social issues of biomonitoring in the European Union. Toxicol Lett 144:117–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

See Also

  1. (2012) Adduct. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 43. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_80Google Scholar
  2. (2012) Biomarkers. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 408–409. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_6601Google Scholar
  3. (2012) Biotransformation. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 415. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_651Google Scholar
  4. (2012) Cytogenetics. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 1050–1051. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_1470Google Scholar
  5. (2012) Genotype. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 1540. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_2396Google Scholar
  6. (2012) Internal dose. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 1897. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_3105Google Scholar
  7. (2012) Kinetic parameters. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 1943. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_3223Google Scholar
  8. (2012) Metabolic capability. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 2255. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_3653Google Scholar
  9. (2012) Metabolite. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 2258. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_3661Google Scholar
  10. (2012) Phenotype. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 2856. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_4514Google Scholar
  11. (2012) Standardization. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 3501. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_5480Google Scholar
  12. (2012) Toxicology. In: Schwab M (ed) Encyclopedia of cancer, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, p 3734. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16483-5_5873Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Finnish Institute of Occupational HealthHelsinkiFinland