Studying the Impact of Persistent Organic Pollutants Exposure on Human Health by Proteomic Analysis: A Systematic Review
Guillotin S., Delcourt N.
Systematic Review, published in Int J Mol Sci (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Systematic Review
- Journal
- Int J Mol Sci (2022)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 36430748
- PMCID
- PMC9692675
- DOI
- 10.3390/ijms232214271
- Citations
- 21
Abstract (original English)
Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are organic chemical substances that are widely distributed in environments around the globe. POPs accumulate in living organisms and are found at high concentrations in the food chain. Humans are thus continuously exposed to these chemical substances, in which they exert hepatic, reproductive, developmental, behavioral, neurologic, endocrine, cardiovascular, and immunologic adverse health effects. However, considerable information is unknown regarding the mechanism by which POPs exert their adverse effects in humans, as well as the molecular and cellular responses involved. Data are notably lacking concerning the consequences of acute and chronic POP exposure on changes in gene expression, protein profile, and metabolic pathways. We conducted a systematic review to provide a synthesis of knowledge of POPs arising from proteomics-based research. The data source used for this review was PubMed. This study was carried out following the PRISMA guidelines. Of the 742 items originally identified, 89 were considered in the review. This review presents a comprehensive overview of the most recent research and available solutions to explore proteomics datasets to identify new features relevant to human health. Future perspectives in proteomics studies are discussed.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.