↓ Skip to main content

Measurement and Comparison of Organic Compound Concentrations in Plasma, Whole Blood, and Dried Blood Spot Samples

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Measurement and Comparison of Organic Compound Concentrations in Plasma, Whole Blood, and Dried Blood Spot Samples
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2016.00064
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stuart A. Batterman, Sergey Chernyak, Feng-Chiao Su

Abstract

The preferred sampling medium for measuring human exposures of persistent organic compounds (POPs) is blood, and relevant sample types include whole blood, plasma, and dried blood spots (DBS). Because information regarding the performance and comparability of measurements across these sample types is limited, it is difficult to compare across studies. This study evaluates the performance of POP measurements in plasma, whole blood and DBS, and presents the distribution coefficients needed to convert concentrations among the three sample types. Blood samples were collected from adult volunteers, along with demographic and smoking information, and analyzed by GC/MS for organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), chlorinated hydrocarbons (CHCs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and brominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). Regression models were used to evaluate the relationships between the sample types and possible effects of personal covariates. Distribution coefficients also were calculated using physically-based models. Across all compounds, concentrations in plasma were consistently the highest; concentrations in whole blood and DBS samples were comparable. Distribution coefficients for plasma to whole blood concentrations ranged from 1.74 to 2.26 for pesticides/CHCs, averaged 1.69 ± 0.06 for the PCBs, and averaged 1.65 ± 0.03 for the PBDEs. Regression models closely fit most chemicals (R (2) > 0.80), and whole blood and DBS samples generally showed very good agreement. Distribution coefficients estimated using biologically-based models were near one and did not explain the observed distribution. Among the study population, median concentrations of several pesticides/CHCs and PBDEs exceeded levels reported in the 2007-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, while levels of other OCPs and PBDEs were comparable or lower. Race and smoking status appeared to slightly affect plasma/blood concentration ratios for several POPs. The experimentally-determined distribution coefficients can be used to compare POP exposures across studies using different types of blood-based matrices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 26%
Student > Master 7 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 7 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 23%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 10%
Chemistry 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,706,566
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#8,905
of 12,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,967
of 300,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#66
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,325 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,611 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.