Environmental and Occupational Exposures, Organ Toxicity and Biomarkers

Abstract

Environmental and occupational pollutants represent a persistent threat to global public health, contributing substantially to the global burden of non-communicable diseases. These diverse agents—including heavy metals, particulate matter, and emerging contaminants—frequently converge on a core set of toxic mechanisms, most notably oxidative stress, inflammation, mitochondrial dysfunction, apoptosis, and dysregulated autophagy. The resulting multi-organ toxicity, affecting the pulmonary, nervous, hepatic, and renal systems, underscores the need for early and reliable detection of biological effects. This review synthesizes current knowledge on typical environmental and occupational toxicants, their mechanisms of action across different organ systems, and the evolving landscape of early effect biomarkers. We critically evaluate exposure assessment methodologies and key epidemiological evidence, including dose-response relationships. Finally, we discuss prevention strategies, current research challenges, and future directions, emphasizing the potential of high-throughput detection and multi-omics approaches to transform exposure surveillance and targeted intervention.

Share and Cite:

Huo, R. (2026) Environmental and Occupational Exposures, Organ Toxicity and Biomarkers. Journal of Biosciences and Medicines, 14, 493-516. doi: 10.4236/jbm.2026.145033.

1. Introduction

Environmental and occupational pollutants remain a major global health threat, accounting for an estimated nine million premature deaths annually―one in six of all deaths worldwide [1] [2]. These exposures, which include ambient and indoor air pollution, toxic chemicals, heavy metals, and occupational dusts, contribute substantially to the global burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) [3] [4]. Importantly, pollution is no longer a local issue but a planetary threat that requires urgent, coordinated action [2].

Despite the structural diversity of these toxicants, they often converge on a limited set of shared pathogenic mechanisms. Oxidative stress, triggered by an overproduction of reactive oxygen species, is a central event [3] [5]. This is followed by activation of pro-inflammatory cascades, mitochondrial dysfunction, and the induction of programmed cell death pathways such as apoptosis and autophagy [4] [6]. Epigenetic alterations further mediate the long-term consequences of early-life exposures, linking developmental insults to adult disease [7]. Understanding these common pathways is essential for identifying early biological effects before overt organ damage occurs.

Biomarkers of early toxic effects have gained significant attention. They offer a window of opportunity for intervention, allowing detection of subclinical injury in the lung, liver, kidney, or nervous system [8] [9]. The exposome paradigm―encompassing the totality of lifelong environmental exposures―provides a powerful framework for integrating biomarker data with internal biological responses [8] [9]. However, challenges remain in assessing complex chemical mixtures and translating mechanistic findings from in vitro models to human populations [5] [10].

The review is to summarise current research on typical environmental and occupational pollutants, their multi-organ toxicity and underlying mechanisms, and the emerging landscape of early effect biomarkers. We also critically evaluate exposure assessment approaches and epidemiological evidence, and discuss prevention strategies and future research directions, with an emphasis on high-throughput and multi-omics technologies.

2. Typical Environmental and Occupational Pollutants

Environmental and occupational pollutants encompass a diverse array of chemical and physical agents that share the ability to induce adverse health effects in exposed populations. Based on their sources, physicochemical properties, and exposure pathways, these toxicants can be conveniently categorized into four major groups: heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants (POPs), particulate matter and occupational dust, emerging environmental contaminants, and food-related contaminants. Table 1 provides a comparative overview of these categories.

2.1. Heavy Metals and Persistent Organic Pollutants

Heavy metals such as lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), mercury (Hg), and arsenic (As) are naturally occurring elements with high atomic weights and densities at least five times that of water [11]. Their widespread industrial, agricultural, and domestic applications have led to significant environmental dissemination, raising serious public health concerns [11] [12]. These metals are considered systemic toxicants that induce multi-organ damage even at low exposure levels and are classified as known or probable human carcinogens by the US EPA and IARC [11].

Table 1. Typical environmental and occupational pollutants.

Lead remains particularly hazardous to children due to high gastrointestinal uptake and a permeable blood-brain barrier, with neurotoxic effects observed at lower levels than previously recognized [12]. Cadmium, primarily from nickel-cadmium batteries and cigarette smoke, causes kidney damage and bone effects, while mercury exposure via fish consumption poses risks to fetal neurological development [12]-[14]. The primary mechanisms involve oxidative stress, enzyme inactivation, and interference with DNA repair [13] [15].

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs), including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), share the characteristics of environmental persistence, bioaccumulation, and long-range transport [16]. Many POPs act as endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), interfering with hormone synthesis, metabolism, and signaling [17]. Epidemiological evidence has linked POP exposure to endometriosis, reproductive disorders, neurodevelopmental deficits, and metabolic diseases [18] [19].

2.2. Particulate Matter and Occupational Dust

Particulate matter (PM), particularly fine (PM2.5) and inhalable (PM10) fractions, is a complex mixture of sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, metals, and biological materials [20]. The Global Exposure Mortality Model (GEMM) estimates that ambient air pollution causes 8.8 million excess deaths annually, with a loss of life expectancy of 2.9 years―exceeding that of tobacco smoking [21]. The WHO Global Air Quality Guidelines (2021) have substantially lowered recommended exposure limits based on growing evidence of adverse effects at very low concentrations [22]. PM2.5 penetrates deep into lung alveoli, enters the bloodstream, and triggers oxidative stress and pulmonary inflammation, contributing to cardiorespiratory diseases, lung cancer, and adverse birth outcomes [20] [23]. A joint ERS/ATS policy statement provides an analytical framework for interpreting the adversity of air pollution effects across multiple organ systems, including the cardiovascular and central nervous systems [20].

Occupational dusts―coal mine dust, crystalline silica, asbestos, and wood dust―remain major causes of preventable lung diseases in industrial settings. These particles induce chronic inflammation, fibrosis (pneumoconiosis), and malignant transformation, with clear exposure-response relationships documented in mining, construction, and textile workers [24].

2.3. Emerging Environmental Contaminants

Emerging contaminants are chemicals or materials that have recently been detected in the environment and are not yet routinely monitored, but have known or suspected adverse health effects. Microplastics (plastic particles < 5 mm, including nanoplastics < 1 μm) are ubiquitous in water, air, food, and even human biological samples such as breast milk, urine, and semen [25] [26]. Human exposure occurs via ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact. Hazard assessment suggests that microplastics can induce oxidative stress, inflammatory lesions, and particle toxicity, with potential chronic inflammation and neoplastic risk [25]. Advanced analytical methods, including pyrolysis-GC-MS, have confirmed microplastic presence in drinking water supplies [27].

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, “forever chemicals”) comprise over 4000 synthetic compounds widely used for their water- and grease-repellent properties [28]. PFAS accumulate in the ocean, groundwater, and human serum. Epidemiological studies have demonstrated significant associations with dyslipidemia, adverse immune outcomes in children, liver disease, kidney disease, and certain cancers [28] [29]. Exposure occurs via seafood, drinking water, food packaging, and indoor environments, with contaminated sites often located near airports and military bases where aqueous film-forming foams were used [28]. Other emerging contaminants include pharmaceutical residues, engineered nanomaterials, and disinfection by-products, which are increasingly detected through non-targeted screening methods based on high-resolution mass spectrometry [30] [31].

2.4. Food-Related Contaminants

Dietary intake represents a major route of human exposure to many environmental toxicants. Food-related contaminants include naturally occurring toxins (e.g., aflatoxins produced by Aspergillus species), process-induced chemicals (e.g., acrylamide from high-temperature cooking), and environmental pollutants that enter the food chain through contaminated water, soil, or feed (e.g., heavy metals, pesticide residues, POPs) [16]. The FAO/WHO has developed stepwise approaches for dietary exposure assessment, using screening methods followed by more refined estimates when safety concerns cannot be ruled out. Long-term aflatoxin exposure is causally linked to hepatocellular carcinoma, particularly in individuals with chronic hepatitis B infection [16]. Acrylamide, formed during frying and baking, is classified as a probable human carcinogen. Pesticide residues, even at low levels, raise concerns about endocrine disruption and neurodevelopmental toxicity, especially in children [17] [18]. The Global Environment Monitoring System (GEMS/Food) Consumption Cluster Diets have been recommended as tools for international chronic dietary exposure assessments.

3. Multi-Organ Toxicity and Underlying Mechanisms

The diverse array of environmental and occupational pollutants ultimately converges on a limited set of organ systems, with the lung, brain, liver, and kidney being the most frequently affected targets. The pathological outcomes are determined by both the physicochemical properties of the toxicant and the vulnerability of the target organ. This section synthesizes current knowledge on multi-organ toxicity, highlighting the shared and distinct mechanisms that underpin pollutant-induced injury, with a particular focus on oxidative stress, inflammation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and disrupted cellular quality control pathways. Table 2 summarizes major environmental/occupational pollutants, target organs, and key toxic mechanisms.

Table 2. Environmental/occupational pollutants, target organs, and key toxic mechanisms.

3.1. Pulmonary Toxicity

As the primary portal of entry for inhaled pollutants, the lung is a principal target organ for environmental and occupational toxicants. Airborne particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), diesel exhaust, coal dust, and crystalline silica are well-established inducers of respiratory morbidity and mortality. A workshop report from the American Thoracic Society concluded that long-term exposure to air pollution, particularly traffic-related metrics such as nitrogen dioxide and black carbon, is causally associated with the onset of childhood asthma [32]. However, the evidence for adult-onset asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains insufficient, although plausible mechanistic pathways exist [32].

Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) induces lung injury through complex molecular cascades. Recent work has uncovered that PM2.5 exposure upregulates the m6A methyltransferase METTL3, which stabilises PINK1 mRNA, thereby activating PINK1-dependent mitophagy. Excessive mitophagy, in turn, promotes ferroptosis―an iron-dependent lipid peroxidation-driven cell death―in bronchial epithelial cells, leading to inflammatory infiltration and mucus hypersecretion [33]. This study provides a compelling mechanistic link between epigenetic modification and pollutant-induced ferroptosis.

Occupational dusts remain a major global health burden. Coal workers’ pneumoconiosis and silicosis are progressive fibrotic lung diseases resulting from prolonged inhalation of coal and silica particles [34]. The pathogenesis of silicosis involves the uptake of crystalline silica by alveolar macrophages, triggering NLRP3 inflammasome activation, release of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, IL-18), and subsequent fibroblast proliferation and extracellular matrix deposition [35]. Despite advances in understanding these molecular events, no curative treatment currently exists, although nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems offer a promising therapeutic avenue [36].

3.2. Neurotoxicity

The central nervous system (CNS) is increasingly recognised as a critical target of air pollution, contributing to both neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorders [37] [38]. Epidemiological studies have linked ambient pollutant exposure to increased incidence of autism spectrum disorders, Alzheimer’s disease, and Parkinson’s disease [38] [39]. A systematic review by Grandjean and Landrigan identified manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, and other industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants, underscoring the vulnerability of the developing brain [39].

The mechanisms by which pollutants reach the CNS and incite pathology involve systemic inflammation, translocation via the olfactory nerve, and disruption of the blood-brain barrier. Once within the brain parenchyma, pollutants activate microglia―the resident innate immune cells―leading to chronic neuroinflammation and sustained production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) [37]. In animal models, acute exposure to diesel exhaust (250 - 300 µg/m3 for 6 hours) induces microglial activation, increased lipid peroxidation, and impaired adult neurogenesis in the hippocampus and olfactory bulb, with more pronounced effects in male mice, possibly due to lower expression of the antioxidant enzyme paraoxonase 2 [38].

Manganese-induced Parkinsonism exemplifies metal-specific neurotoxicity. High manganese exposure triggers oxidative stress, transporter dysfunction, dysregulation of signaling pathways, and impaired autophagy, culminating in dopaminergic neuronal loss and extrapyramidal symptoms resembling idiopathic Parkinson’s disease [39]. Chelation therapy with CaNa2EDTA and natural compounds such as vinpocetine and curcumin has shown promise in preclinical models, though clinical translation remains limited [39].

3.3. Hepatotoxicity and Nephrotoxicity

The liver, as the primary site of xenobiotic metabolism, is highly susceptible to pollutant-induced injury. Toxicant-associated fatty liver disease (TAFLD) has emerged as a distinct entity within the spectrum of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). A systematic screen of rodent toxicology databases (ToxRefDB and CEBS) identified 123 chemicals associated with fatty liver, including pesticides, solvents, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and dioxins [38]. Pesticides were the most frequently identified, while PCBs/dioxins exhibited the highest potency [38].

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), such as bisphenol A and phthalates, interfere with nuclear receptor signaling and mitochondrial function, promoting hepatic steatosis through epigenetic mechanisms, including altered DNA methylation and microRNA expression [40]. Microplastics represent an emerging threat. Co-exposure of zebrafish to polystyrene microplastics and the antibiotic oxytetracycline at environmentally realistic concentrations induced significant lipid accumulation, hepatic oxidative stress, and inflammation, accompanied by gut dysbiosis and elevated serum lipopolysaccharide (LPS), suggesting a gut-liver axis-mediated mechanism [41]. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, “forever chemicals”) accumulate in the liver and kidney, where they interfere with hepatic transporters (e.g., OATP, BSEP), resulting in altered lipid metabolism and elevated serum cholesterol―a finding consistently reported in human epidemiological studies [42].

The kidney―particularly the proximal tubule―is exquisitely vulnerable to metal toxicity due to its high mitochondrial density and role in concentrating filtrate. A meta-analysis of 31 studies (195,015 participants) demonstrated a significant inverse association between cadmium exposure and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), especially for blood cadmium levels (β = −0.12) [43]. Cadmium disrupts renal homeostasis by activating the ATF4-CHOP transcriptional axis, inducing ER stress, mitochondrial ROS production, and impaired autophagy/mitophagy, ultimately leading to apoptosis of proximal tubular cells [44]. Mechanistic reviews of arsenic, cadmium, and lead confirm that these metals inhibit electron transport chain complexes, deplete mitochondrial membrane potential, and promote oxidative imbalance in a dose- and metal-dependent manner [45] [46]. The gut-liver axis further modulates hepatic pathology: microbial metabolites and LPS translocate to the liver via the portal vein, aggravating inflammation, fibrosis, and even hepatocarcinogenesis [44] [47].

3.4. Oxidative Stress and Inflammatory Pathways

Oxidative stress is the central unifying mechanism underlying pollutant-induced organ toxicity. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) are generated by tightly regulated enzymes, including NAD(P)H oxidase and nitric oxide synthase; however, excessive ROS production―either from mitochondrial electron transport chain leakage or exogenous pollutant stimulation―overwhelms endogenous antioxidant defences (glutathione, superoxide dismutase, catalase), leading to oxidative damage to lipids, proteins, and DNA [48] [49]. This “two-faced” character of ROS is well established: at low/moderate levels, ROS act as secondary messengers in cell signaling, whereas at high levels they drive pathogenesis across numerous diseases, including cancer, neurodegeneration, and ageing [6].

The transcription factor NF-κB plays a pivotal role in mediating pollutant-induced inflammation. ROS activate NF-κB, which translocates to the nucleus and upregulates pro-inflammatory genes encoding cytokines (TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6), chemokines, and adhesion molecules [8]. In parallel, the NLRP3 inflammasome is activated by diverse triggers, including mitochondrial dysfunction, lysosomal damage, and ionic flux; its activation leads to caspase-1-mediated cleavage of pro-IL-1β and pro-IL-18, amplifying the inflammatory cascade [50]. Aberrant NLRP3 activation is linked to cryopyrin-associated periodic syndromes, atherosclerosis, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease [50], all of which have been associated with environmental pollutant exposure.

3.5. Mitochondrial Damage, Apoptosis, and Autophagy

Mitochondria are both sources and primary targets of pollutant-induced oxidative injury. Environmental toxicants―including metals, pesticides, and air pollutants―impair mitochondrial function through multiple mechanisms: inhibition of electron transport chain complexes, depletion of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), opening of the permeability transition pore (mPTP), and loss of membrane potential [51] [52]. The concept of “ROS-induced ROS release” (RIRR) describes a regenerative cycle in which initial ROS production triggers mPTP opening, causing further ROS release that can propagate from mitochondrion to mitochondrion, ultimately culminating in cell death [52]. Brief, reversible mPTP openings may serve a physiological housekeeping role by releasing accumulated ROS and Ca2+, whereas sustained openings lead to mitochondrial destruction [52].

When damage is sublethal, autophagy―particularly mitophagy―serves as a quality control mechanism to remove dysfunctional mitochondria. Autophagy is mediated by a complex molecular machinery (Atg proteins and lysosomal hydrolases) that sequesters damaged organelles into autophagosomes for lysosomal degradation [53] [54]. However, chronic pollutant exposure can dysregulate autophagy. For example, PM2.5-induced METTL3-mediated mitophagy becomes excessive, driving ferroptosis rather than cytoprotection [33]. Similarly, cadmium inhibits autophagic flux, leading to accumulation of damaged organelles and exacerbation of apoptosis [55]. The interplay between mitochondrial dysfunction, autophagy, and oxidative stress is particularly relevant to degenerative diseases, where failure of these pathways contributes to progressive tissue injury [53].

4. Early Biomarkers of Toxic Effects

The early detection of biological effects induced by environmental and occupational exposures is critical for preventing progression to overt disease. Biomarkers of effect―measurable indicators of cellular or systemic alterations following exposure―provide a window of opportunity for intervention before irreversible organ damage occurs [56] [57]. These biomarkers span multiple hierarchical levels, from relatively non-specific oxidative stress and inflammatory indices to tissue-specific damage markers and high-resolution molecular signatures (genes, proteins, metabolites). The integration of such biomarkers into human biomonitoring (HBM) frameworks, as exemplified by the European HBM4EU initiative, has demonstrated their utility in detecting early biological changes and identifying vulnerable subpopulations [56].

4.1. Oxidative Stress Biomarkers

Oxidative stress represents the final common pathway for a wide array of environmental toxicants, including heavy metals, particulate matter (PM), and organic pollutants [58] [59]. The overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the consequent damage to lipids, proteins, and DNA form the basis for a panel of well-established biomarkers [60] [61].

Commonly measured oxidative stress biomarkers include (Table 3):

1) Lipid peroxidation products: Malondialdehyde (MDA) and 4-hydroxynonenal (4-HNE) are the most frequently quantified end-products, detectable in plasma, urine, and exhaled breath condensate [60] [62].

2) Protein oxidation markers: Protein carbonyls and advanced oxidation protein products (AOPP) reflect oxidative modification of amino acid residues [60].

3) DNA oxidation marker: 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) is a widely used urinary biomarker of oxidative DNA damage, with elevated levels observed following exposure to PM and metals [60] [62].

A systematic review of occupational exposure to nanomaterials found that although no single specific biomarker exists, a panel comprising multiple oxidative stress markers (e.g., MDA, 8-OHdG, and reduced glutathione) appears more feasible for exposure assessment than any single indicator [58]. Recent advances in analytical chemistry, including chemical isotope labeling and mass spectrometry imaging, have significantly improved the sensitivity and specificity of these measurements, enabling detection of subtle exposure-induced changes in human biofluids [60]. The HBM4EU project has successfully implemented urinary MDA and 8-OHdG as effect biomarkers in occupational studies of hexavalent chromium exposure, confirming their ability to detect early biological responses [56].

Table 3. Representative early effect biomarkers of environmental and occupational exposures.

4.2. Inflammatory Cytokines

Environmental pollutants induce a sterile inflammatory response through activation of pattern recognition receptors (e.g., TLR4, NLRP3) and redox-sensitive transcription factors (notably NF-κB), leading to the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines [63] [64]. C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and fibrinogen are the most extensively studied systemic inflammatory biomarkers in environmental epidemiology [65].

A comprehensive meta-analysis of 38 studies comprising over 210,000 participants demonstrated significant positive associations between short-term exposure to gaseous air pollutants (O₃, NO2, SO2) and circulating CRP levels. Specifically, a 10 µg/m3 increase in O₃, NO2, and SO2 was associated with 1.05%, 1.60%, and 10.44% increases in CRP, respectively. Moreover, NO2 exposure correlated with a 4.85% increase in TNF-α [65]. These findings confirm that even brief elevations in ambient pollutants activate a systemic inflammatory state, providing a mechanistic link to increased cardiovascular risk.

Beyond traditional cytokines, high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) has emerged as a key damage-associated molecular pattern (DAMP) molecule that amplifies inflammation via TLR4 signaling. Extracellular HMGB1 exists in multiple redox-dependent isoforms: the disulfide form (cysteines 23 and 45 linked, cysteine 106 reduced) acts as a potent cytokine inducer, while the all-thiol form directs chemotaxis [63] [66] [67]. Elevated serum HMGB1 levels have been documented in malignant mesothelioma patients with asbestos exposure, and specific isoforms (hyper-acetylated and disulfide) are increasingly recognized as sensitive disease biomarkers [67] [68]. The NLRP3 inflammasome, a central mediator of PANoptosis (concurrent pyroptosis, apoptosis, and necroptosis), is also activated by diverse environmental toxicants, including trichloroethylene and chlorinated phenols, leading to robust IL-1β and IL-18 release [64] [69] [70].

4.3. Tissue-Specific Damage Markers

While oxidative stress and inflammation reflect global responses, tissue-specific biomarkers offer the advantage of localizing injury to a particular organ, thereby increasing diagnostic precision.

1) Lung: Club cell secretory protein (CC16) is a sensitive indicator of bronchiolar epithelial integrity, and its decline in serum correlates with air pollution-induced lung barrier disruption. Surfactant protein D (SP-D) reflects alveolar damage [56]. These markers have been successfully implemented in the HBM4EU occupational studies.

2) Kidney: Traditional metrics (serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen) are late and non-specific indicators of acute kidney injury (AKI). Next-generation biomarkers, including kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), and microalbuminuria, enable earlier detection of proximal tubular injury, often within hours of toxicant exposure [61] [71]. The Predictive Safety Testing Consortium (PSTC) has validated KIM-1 and NGAL as safety biomarkers for regulatory decision-making, significantly improving the preclinical detection of nephrotoxic potential [61].

3) Liver: Although not covered in detail in the provided references, established liver injury markers such as alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and more novel apoptosis markers (e.g., cytokeratin-18 fragments) are commonly used in environmental hepatotoxicity studies.

4.4. Molecular Biomarkers (Genes, Proteins, Metabolites)

The advent of high-throughput omics technologies has revolutionized biomarker discovery, allowing simultaneous assessment of hundreds to thousands of molecular features. These approaches are central to the exposome paradigm, which seeks to comprehensively characterize the totality of environmental exposures and their biological consequences [57] [72] [73].

1) Epigenetic biomarkers: DNA methylation at specific loci can serve as an integrator of past exposures and a predictor of future disease risk. In the HBM4EU project, the methylation status of the BDNF (brain-derived neurotrophic factor) and KISS1 (kisspeptin) genes was evaluated as molecular markers of neurological and reproductive health, respectively [56]. A classic example is the demonstration that infant bisphenol A (BPA) exposure was longitudinally associated with adolescent behavioral dysfunction, a relationship mediated by altered BDNF methylation [56]. More broadly, environmental chemicals, including metals, air pollutants, and persistent organic pollutants, have been shown to induce aberrant DNA methylation, histone modifications, and microRNA expression, which may persist across generations [74] [75].

2) Transcriptomic and proteomic biomarkers: Although less routinely applied in surveillance programs, transcriptomic signatures (e.g., altered expression of oxidative stress and inflammatory genes) and proteomic panels are increasingly used in mechanistic studies. The HELIX (Human Early-Life Exposome) project has combined multi-omic profiling (transcriptome, proteome, epigenome, metabolome) with detailed exposure assessment in mother-child cohorts to identify molecular pathways linking environmental exposures to child health outcomes [57].

3) Metabolomic biomarkers: Untargeted metabolomics provides a global readout of metabolic perturbations induced by pollutant exposure. A systematic review of PM exposure and multi-omics signatures reported consistent alterations in pro-oxidant metabolites (e.g., eicosanoids, ceramides) and disruption of antioxidant pathways (e.g., glutathione, vitamins C and E metabolism), alongside changes in energy metabolism and fatty acid oxidation [61]. The HBM4EU occupational studies have successfully incorporated untargeted urinary metabolomics to detect biological changes in response to Cr (VI) exposure [56].

4) Novel cell death-related biomarkers: Recent research has identified biomarkers associated with non-apoptotic regulated cell death pathways, particularly ferroptosis and PANoptosis. Ferroptosis, an iron-dependent lipid peroxidation process, is implicated in cadmium and other heavy metal toxicities, and markers such as lipid hydroperoxides, altered glutathione peroxidase 4 (GPX4) activity, and malondialdehyde accumulation are being explored as exposure-specific effect markers [76]-[80]. Similarly, PANoptosis (integration of pyroptosis, apoptosis, and necroptosis) can be monitored through detection of cleaved gasdermin D, caspase-8, and mixed lineage kinase domain-like protein (MLKL) [64] [69]. Although these markers are currently confined to mechanistic studies, they hold promise for future translation into population-based biomonitoring.

A tiered approach to effect biomarker implementation is recommended: i) first-line markers of oxidative stress and inflammation for routine surveillance; ii) tissue-specific markers when organ injury is suspected; and iii) high-dimensional omics signatures for hypothesis-generating exposomic research. The ongoing validation of these biomarkers within large-scale HBM frameworks (e.g., HBM4EU, HELIX) will continue to refine their application in environmental and occupational health practice [56] [57].

5. Exposure Assessment and Epidemiological Evidence

Accurate characterization of both external and internal exposures is foundational to understanding the health effects of environmental and occupational pollutants. This section synthesizes current approaches to exposure assessment, synthesizes key population-based epidemiological evidence, and examines the characterization of dose-response relationships.

5.1. Environmental and Occupational Exposure Assessment

Traditional exposure assessment has relied on environmental monitoring (ambient air, water, soil) and biological monitoring (blood, urine, hair, nails) of specific pollutants. However, these methods often capture only a fraction of the total exposure burden. The exposome paradigm―conceptualized as the totality of environmental exposures from conception to death―offers a more holistic framework [81]. Recent advances in high-resolution mass spectrometry and non-targeted analysis have enabled the simultaneous detection of hundreds of chemicals, including emerging contaminants such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), microplastics, and halogenated by-products [82]. For occupational settings, the assessment of engineered nanomaterials remains challenging; effect biomarkers measured in exhaled breath condensate or urine are increasingly used to monitor subclinical physiological changes in exposed workers [83]. Integrating wearable sensors with multi-omics platforms is now expanding the capacity to capture personal exposure dynamics in real time [82]. Despite these advances, critical gaps persist in low- and middle-income countries, where conventional monitoring infrastructure is often lacking [81].

5.2. Population-Based Epidemiological Studies

Long-term cohort studies have provided the most robust evidence linking air pollution exposure to mortality and morbidity. Over 25 years of follow-up of diverse cohorts―including the Harvard Six Cities study, the American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II, and more recent administrative cohorts―has consistently demonstrated that long-term exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) increases the risk of all-cause, cardiopulmonary, and lung cancer mortality [84]. Meta-analyses of these studies have substantially strengthened causal inferences [84] [85]. Short-term panel studies further show that daily variations in PM2.5 and ozone are associated with increased hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, with effects observed even at concentrations below current regulatory standards [85]. The 2022 Lancet Countdown report extends this evidence by documenting that climate change-induced heatwaves and wildfires are amplifying the health burden of air pollution, particularly among vulnerable populations such as older adults and young children [86]. Meanwhile, the integration of intersectionality frameworks into exposome research has begun to reveal how racial and socioeconomic factors modify exposure-effect relationships, as illustrated by work on uterine fibroids in Black women [81].

5.3. Dose-Response Relationships

A key finding from epidemiological studies is the absence of an identifiable safe threshold for several pollutants. For PM2.5, concentration-response functions are steeper at lower concentrations, implying that public health benefits accrue from reducing even already-low levels of exposure [84] [85]. Benchmark dose modeling has largely replaced the traditional no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) approach in environmental risk assessment, as it makes fuller use of the dose-response curve [85]. However, characterizing dose-response relationships for complex mixtures―such as occupational dusts containing multiple metals and organic compounds―remains methodologically challenging [83]. Emerging evidence from multi-omics studies suggests that low-dose exposures may activate adaptive pathways (e.g., Nrf2-mediated antioxidant responses) before overt toxicity appears, indicating a hormetic zone that must be carefully distinguished from adverse effects [82] [87]. Table 4 summarises key exposure assessment methods and their epidemiological applications.

Table 4. The key exposure assessment methods and their epidemiological applications in population studies.

Modern exposure assessment has evolved from single-pollutant monitoring towards multi-dimensional exposome characterization. Epidemiological evidence from long-term cohorts has firmly established dose-dependent adverse effects of air pollution, with no clear threshold. Translating these insights into regulatory action requires continued refinement of exposure assessment tools, particularly for vulnerable populations and emerging contaminants [81] [82].

6. Prevention, Intervention, and Future Perspectives

6.1. Prevention and Control Strategies

Primary prevention―source reduction, engineering controls, and regulatory standards―remains the cornerstone of mitigating exposure risks. A systematic review of air pollution control strategies found that nearly 70% of studies reported economic benefits outweighing costs, primarily through reduced morbidity and mortality from particulate matter [88]. For metal mixtures, enhanced monitoring and stricter occupational safety regulations are urgently needed, especially for vulnerable populations [89].

Beyond exposure reduction, pharmacological interventions targeting core toxic mechanisms have gained traction. N-Acetylcysteine reduced mortality in acute copper poisoning in mice, though it was ineffective against thallium and cadmium [90]. Activation of the Nrf2 signaling pathway―a master regulator of antioxidative enzymes―attenuates toxicity from electrophilic insults, with several Nrf2 activators in clinical development [91] [92]. Antioxidant nanoformulations using biodegradable carriers overcome the poor bioavailability of free antioxidants [93]. Natural products such as curcumin, resveratrol, and glycyrrhizin also show promise; glycyrrhizin directly inhibits HMGB1-mediated NF-κB signaling and ER stress in particulate matter-induced lung injury [94].

6.2. Challenges in Current Research

Several obstacles hinder progress. First, real-world exposures involve complex mixtures, yet most studies focus on single agents. The exposome concept offers a systematic framework but remains in early operational stages [95]. Second, gene-environment interactions are poorly understood; although genome-wide studies have identified susceptibility variants, these await mechanistic validation [96]. Third, even promising interventions show limited efficacy in complex models―Fer-1, a ferroptosis inhibitor, did not substantially alleviate major toxic outcomes in rats exposed to 1-nitropyrene [97]. Fourth, translating nanomedicines and small-molecule inhibitors faces bioavailability and off-target hurdles [98]. Traditional risk assessment frameworks have also been criticized for using incomplete or biased data [99]. Finally, advanced models such as microphysiological systems (MPS) and adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) have not been widely adopted by regulators due to qualification gaps and insufficient stakeholder communication [100].

6.3. Future Directions: High-Throughput Detection, Multi-Omics, and Targeted Intervention

High-resolution mass spectrometry and network science now enable comprehensive exposome assessment at a scale comparable to the human genome [100]. The environment-wide association study (EWAS) paradigm has identified environmental factors associated with type 2 diabetes with effect sizes comparable to genetic loci [101]. High-throughput in vitro screening and in silico toxicology are gradually being incorporated into regulatory practice [102].

Multi-omics integration―combining transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, and metagenomics―provides mechanistic insights into host-microbial metabolic disruptions caused by pollutants [97]. Organ-on-a-chip and MPS technologies recapitulate physiologically relevant tissue environments, reducing animal testing while improving human predictivity [100] [103]. AOP frameworks systematically link molecular initiating events to adverse outcomes, supporting cross-chemical extrapolation [104]. Machine learning models for toxicity prediction from chemical structures are advancing, though success depends on careful validation [105].

On the therapeutic front, targeted interventions are shifting from broad antioxidants to pathway-specific modulators, including NRF2-KEAP1-targeted agents, ferroptosis inhibitors, and RIPK1 inhibitors for inflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases [105] [106]. A systems-based, agnostic approach to the exposome, combined with precision intervention strategies, promises to transform the prevention and management of pollutant-induced diseases.

7. Conclusion

Environmental and occupational pollutants exert their deleterious health effects through a set of conserved mechanisms―oxidative stress, inflammation, mitochondrial damage, and disrupted cell death pathways―leading to multi-organ toxicity in the lung, brain, liver, and kidney. Early biomarkers of effect, ranging from oxidized DNA bases to tissue-specific proteins and molecular omics signatures, provide a powerful toolkit for detecting harm before irreversible injury occurs. Epidemiological evidence, particularly from well-designed cohort studies with robust exposure assessment, continues to refine our understanding of dose-response relationships, often demonstrating effects below traditional safety thresholds. Moving forward, the integration of high-resolution exposomics with multi-omics and mechanistic in vitro models promises to usher in an era of precision environmental health. For public health and occupational protection, the priority remains clear: primary prevention through regulation and engineering controls, complemented by biomarker-based surveillance to protect the most vulnerable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] Landrigan, P.J., Fuller, R., Acosta, N.J.R., Adeyi, O., Arnold, R., Basu, N., et al. (2018) The Lancet Commission on Pollution and Health. The Lancet, 391, 462-512.[CrossRef]
[2] Fuller, R., Landrigan, P.J., Balakrishnan, K., Bathan, G., Bose-O’Reilly, S., Brauer, M., et al. (2022) Pollution and Health: A Progress Update. The Lancet Planetary Health, 6, e535-e547.[CrossRef]
[3] Schraufnagel, D.E., Bal-mes, J.R., Cowl, C.T., De Matteis, S., Jung, S., Mortimer, K., et al. (2019) Air Pollution and Noncommunicable Diseases: A Review by the Forum of International Respiratory Societies’ Environmental Committee, Part 1: The Damaging Effects of Air Pollution. Chest, 155, 409-416.[CrossRef]
[4] Schraufnagel, D.E., Balmes, J.R., Cowl, C.T., De Matteis, S., Jung, S., Mortimer, K., et al. (2019) Air Pollution and Noncommunicable Diseases: A Review by the Forum of International Respiratory Societies’ Environmental Committee, Part 2: Air Pollution and Organ Systems. Chest, 155, 417-426.[CrossRef]
[5] Hernández, A.F. and Tsatsakis, A.M. (2017) Human Exposure to Chemical Mixtures: Challenges for the Integration of Toxicology with Epidemiology Data in Risk Assessment. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 103, 188-193.[CrossRef]
[6] Li, S., Zhao, M., Zhang, S., Yang, R., Yin, N., Wang, H., et al. (2024) Assessing Developmental Neurotoxicity of Emerging Environmental Chemicals Using Multiple in Vitro Models: A Comparative Analysis. Environmental Pollution, 347, Article ID: 123743.[CrossRef]
[7] Barouki, R., Melén, E., Herceg, Z., Beckers, J., Chen, J., Karagas, M., et al. (2018) Epigenetics as a Mechanism Linking Developmental Exposures to Long-Term Toxicity. Environment International, 114, 77-86.[CrossRef]
[8] Vrijheid, M. (2014) The Exposome: A New Paradigm to Study the Impact of Environment on Health. Thorax, 69, 876-878.[CrossRef]
[9] Vineis, P., Robinson, O., Chadeau-Hyam, M., Dehghan, A., Mudway, I. and Dagnino, S. (2020) What Is New in the Exposome? Environment International, 143, Article ID: 105887.[CrossRef]
[10] Jiang, J., Pieterman, C.D., Ertaylan, G., Peeters, R.L.M. and de Kok, T.M.C.M. (2019) The Application of Omics-Based Human Liver Platforms for Investigating the Mechanism of Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity in Vitro. Archives of Toxicology, 93, 3067-3098.[CrossRef]
[11] Tchounwou, P.B., Yedjou, C.G., Patlolla, A.K. and Sutton, D.J. (2012) Heavy Metal Toxicity and the Environment. In: Luch, A., Ed., Molecular, Clinical and Environmental Toxicology, Springer, 133-164.[CrossRef]
[12] Järup, L. (2003) Hazards of Heavy Metal Contamination. British Medical Bulletin, 68, 167-182.[CrossRef]
[13] Balali-Mood, M., Naseri, K., Tahergorabi, Z., Khazdair, M.R. and Sadeghi, M. (2021) Toxic Mechanisms of Five Heavy Metals: Mercury, Lead, Chromium, Cadmium, and Arsenic. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 12, Article 643972.[CrossRef]
[14] Jaishankar, M., Tseten, T., Anbalagan, N., Mathew, B.B. and Beeregowda, K.N. (2014) Toxicity, Mechanism and Health Effects of Some Heavy Metals. Interdisciplinary Toxicology, 7, 60-72.[CrossRef]
[15] Laoye, B., Olagbemide, P., Ogunnusi, T. and Akpor, O. (2025) Heavy Metal Contamination: Sources, Health Impacts, and Sustainable Mitigation Strategies with Insights from Nigerian Case Studies. F1000Research, 14, Article 134.[CrossRef]
[16] Guo, W., Pan, B., Sakkiah, S., Yavas, G., Ge, W., Zou, W., et al. (2019) Persistent Organic Pollutants in Food: Contamination Sources, Health Effects and Detection Methods. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16, Article 4361.[CrossRef]
[17] Gore, A.C., Chappell, V.A., Fenton, S.E., Flaws, J.A., Nadal, A., Prins, G.S., et al. (2015) EDC-2: The Endocrine Society’s Second Scientific Statement on Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals. Endocrine Reviews, 36, E1-E150.[CrossRef]
[18] Ghassabian, A., Vandenberg, L., Kannan, K. and Trasande, L. (2022) Endocrine-disrupting Chemicals and Child Health. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, 62, 573-594.[CrossRef]
[19] Szczesna, D., Wieczorek, K. and Jurewicz, J. (2023) An Exposure to Endocrine Active Persistent Pollutants and Endometriosis—A Review of Current Epidemiological Studies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 13974-13993.[CrossRef]
[20] Thurston, G.D., Kipen, H., Annesi-Maesano, I., Balmes, J., Brook, R.D., Cromar, K., et al. (2017) A Joint ERS/ATS Policy Statement: What Constitutes an Adverse Health Effect of Air Pollution? An Analytical Framework. European Respiratory Journal, 49, Article ID: 1600419.[CrossRef]
[21] Lelieveld, J., Pozzer, A., Pöschl, U., Fnais, M., Haines, A. and Münzel, T. (2020) Loss of Life Expectancy from Air Pollution Compared to Other Risk Factors: A Worldwide Perspective. Cardiovascular Research, 116, 1910-1917.[CrossRef]
[22] O’Brien, E., Masselot, P., Sera, F., Roye, D., Breitner, S., Ng, C.F.S., et al. (2023) Short-term Association between Sulfur Dioxide and Mortality: A Multicountry Analysis in 399 Cities. Environmental Health Perspectives, 131, Article ID: 37002.[CrossRef]
[23] Thangavel, P., Park, D. and Lee, Y. (2022) Recent Insights into Particulate Matter (PM2.5)-Mediated Toxicity in Humans: An Overview. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, Article 7511.[CrossRef]
[24] Kelly, F.J. and Fussell, J.C. (2020) Toxicity of Airborne Particles—Established Evidence, Knowledge Gaps and Emerging Areas of Importance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 378, Article ID: 20190322.[CrossRef]
[25] Prata, J.C., da Costa, J.P., Lopes, I., Duarte, A.C. and Rocha-Santos, T. (2020) Environmental Exposure to Microplastics: An Overview on Possible Human Health Effects. Science of the Total Environment, 702, Article ID: 134455.[CrossRef]
[26] Aminzai, M.T., Yildirim, M. and Yabalak, E. (2025) Microplastics in the Human Body and Environment: Pathways, Health Impacts, Detection, and Removal Strategies. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 13, Article ID: 119200.[CrossRef]
[27] Gomiero, A., Øysæd, K.B., Palmas, L. and Skogerbø, G. (2021) Application of GCMs-Pyrolysis to Estimate the Levels of Microplastics in a Drinking Water Supply System. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 416, Article ID: 125708.[CrossRef]
[28] Sunderland, E.M., Hu, X.C., Dassuncao, C., Tokranov, A.K., Wagner, C.C. and Allen, J.G. (2019) A Review of the Pathways of Human Exposure to Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASS) and Present Understanding of Health Effects. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 29, 131-147.[CrossRef]
[29] Fenton, S.E., Ducatman, A., Boobis, A., DeWitt, J.C., Lau, C., Ng, C., et al. (2021) Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Toxicity and Human Health Review: Current State of Knowledge and Strategies for Informing Future Research. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 40, 606-630.[CrossRef]
[30] Crimmins, B.S. and Holsen, T.M. (2019) Non-Targeted Screening in Environmental Monitoring Programs. In: Woods, A.G. and Darie, C.C., Eds., Advancements of Mass Spectrometry in Biomedical Research, Springer, 731-741.
[31] Richardson, S.D. and Kimura, S.Y. (2016) Water Analysis: Emerging Contaminants and Current Issues. Analytical Chemistry, 88, 546-582.[CrossRef]
[32] Thurston, G.D., Balmes, J.R., Garcia, E., Gilliland, F.D., Rice, M.B., Schikowski, T., et al. (2020) Outdoor Air Pollution and New-Onset Airway Disease. an Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report. Annals of the American Thoracic Society, 17, 387-398.[CrossRef]
[33] Ran, Q., Gao, J., Li, G., Wang, J., Li, X., Xiong, A., et al. (2025) METTL3-Driven m6A Modification Orchestrates Mitophagy-Dependent Ferroptosis in PM2.5-Induced Lung Injury. Frontiers in Immunology, 16, Article 1683819.[CrossRef]
[34] Vanka, K.S., Shukla, S., Gomez, H.M., James, C., Palanisami, T., Williams, K., et al. (2022) Understanding the Pathogenesis of Occupational Coal and Silica Dust-Associated Lung Disease. European Respiratory Review, 31, Article ID: 210250.[CrossRef]
[35] Yang, B., Liu, X., Peng, C., Meng, X. and Jia, Q. (2025) Silicosis: From Pathogenesis to Therapeutics. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 16, Article 1516200.[CrossRef]
[36] Sherekar, P., Suke, S.G., Dhok, A., Malegaonkar, S. and Dhale, S.A. (2025) Global Scenario of Silica-Associated Diseases: A Review on Emerging Pathophysiology of Silicosis and Potential Therapeutic Regimes. Toxicology Reports, 14, Article ID: 101941.[CrossRef]
[37] Block, M.L. and Calderón-Garcidueñas, L. (2009) Air Pollution: Mechanisms of Neuroinflammation and CNS Disease. Trends in Neurosciences, 32, 506-516.[CrossRef]
[38] Costa, L.G., Cole, T.B., Coburn, J., Chang, Y., Dao, K. and Roqué, P.J. (2017) Neurotoxicity of Traffic-Related Air Pollution. NeuroToxicology, 59, 133-139.[CrossRef]
[39] Khindri, N. and Maj, M. (2025) Manganese-induced Parkinsonism: A Review of Etiologies and Treatments. Degenerative Neurological and Neuromuscular Disease, 15, 65-79.[CrossRef]
[40] Mentsiou Nikolaou, E., Kalafati, I.P. and Dedoussis, G.V. (2024) The Interplay between Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals and the Epigenome Towards Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease: A Comprehensive Review. Nutrients, 16, Article 1124.[CrossRef]
[41] Zhou, W., Shi, W., Du, X., Han, Y., Tang, Y., Ri, S., et al. (2023) Assessment of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Symptoms and Gut-Liver Axis Status in Zebrafish after Exposure to Polystyrene Microplastics and Oxytetracycline, Alone and in Combination. Environmental Health Perspectives, 131, Article ID: 47006.[CrossRef]
[42] Vujic, E., Ferguson, S.S. and Brouwer, K.L.R. (2024) Effects of PFAS on Human Liver Transporters: Implications for Health Outcomes. Toxicological Sciences, 200, 213-227.[CrossRef]
[43] Doccioli, C., Sera, F., Francavilla, A., Cupisti, A. and Biggeri, A. (2024) Association of Cadmium Environmental Exposure with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 906, Article ID: 167165.[CrossRef]
[44] Ohtani, N. and Kawada, N. (2019) Role of the Gut-Liver Axis in Liver Inflammation, Fibrosis, and Cancer: A Special Focus on the Gut Microbiota Relationship. Hepatology Communications, 3, 456-470.[CrossRef]
[45] Turkington, R.E., Hukriede, N.A., Ho, J., Jayasundara, N. and Sanders, A.P. (2025) Metal Mechanisms of Mitochondrial Toxicity: Recent Review of Arsenic, Cadmium, and Lead-Induced Nephrotoxicity. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 32, 14439-14451.[CrossRef]
[46] Orr, S. and Bridges, C. (2017) Chronic Kidney Disease and Exposure to Nephrotoxic Metals. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 18, Article 1039.[CrossRef]
[47] Bäckhed, F., Ding, H., Wang, T., Hooper, L.V., Koh, G.Y., Nagy, A., et al. (2004) The Gut Microbiota as an Environmental Factor That Regulates Fat Storage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 15718-15723.[CrossRef]
[48] Al-Eryani, L., Wahlang, B., Falkner, K.C., Guardiola, J.J., Clair, H.B., Prough, R.A., et al. (2015) Identification of Environmental Chemicals Associated with the Development of Toxicant-Associated Fatty Liver Disease in Rodents. Toxicologic Pathology, 43, 482-497.[CrossRef]
[49] Hong, Y., Boiti, A., Vallone, D. and Foulkes, N.S. (2024) Reactive Oxygen Species Signaling and Oxidative Stress: Transcriptional Regulation and Evolution. Antioxidants, 13, Article 312.[CrossRef]
[50] Kelley, N., Jeltema, D., Duan, Y. and He, Y. (2019) The NLRP3 Inflammasome: An Overview of Mechanisms of Activation and Regulation. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 20, Article 3328.[CrossRef]
[51] Meyer, J.N., Leung, M.C.K., Rooney, J.P., Sendoel, A., Hengartner, M.O., Kisby, G.E., et al. (2013) Mitochondria as a Target of Environmental Toxicants. Toxicological Sciences, 134, 1-17.[CrossRef]
[52] Zorov, D.B., Juhaszova, M. and Sollott, S.J. (2014) Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and Ros-Induced ROS Release. Physiological Reviews, 94, 909-950.[CrossRef]
[53] Lee, J., Giordano, S. and Zhang, J. (2012) Autophagy, Mitochondria and Oxidative Stress: Cross-Talk and Redox Signalling. Biochemical Journal, 441, 523-540.[CrossRef]
[54] Saha, S., Panigrahi, D.P., Patil, S. and Bhutia, S.K. (2018) Autophagy in Health and Disease: A Comprehensive Review. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 104, 485-495.[CrossRef]
[55] Saleem, M.A.U., Zhao, Y., Bano, F., Tang, Y., Li, M., Malhi, K.K., et al. (2025) Cadmium Disrupted Homeostasis of Proximal Renal Tubular Cells via Targeting ATF4-CHOP Complex into the Nucleus. Poultry Science, 104, Article ID: 105059.[CrossRef]
[56] Rodríguez-Carrillo, A., Mustieles, V., Salamanca-Fernández, E., Olivas-Martínez, A., Suárez, B., Bajard, L., et al. (2023) Implementation of Effect Biomarkers in Human Biomonitoring Studies: A Systematic Approach Synergizing Toxicological and Epidemiological Knowledge. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 249, Article ID: 114140.[CrossRef]
[57] Vrijheid, M., Slama, R., Robinson, O., Chatzi, L., Coen, M., van den Hazel, P., et al. (2014) The Human Early-Life Exposome (HELIX): Project Rationale and Design. Environmental Health Perspectives, 122, 535-544.[CrossRef]
[58] Ghafari, J., Moghadasi, N. and Shekaftik, S.O. (2020) Oxidative Stress Induced by Occupational Exposure to Nanomaterials: A Systematic Review. Industrial Health, 58, 492-502.[CrossRef]
[59] Li, K., Geng, Y., Lin, B. and Xi, Z. (2023) Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Mitochondrial Damage, Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress, and Oxidative Stress Induced by Environmental Pollutants. Toxicology Research, 12, 1014-1023.[CrossRef]
[60] Zhou, X., Gao, S., Yue, M., Zhu, S., Liu, Q. and Zhao, X. (2023) Recent Advances in Analytical Methods of Oxidative Stress Biomarkers Induced by Environmental Pollutant Exposure. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 160, Article ID: 116978.[CrossRef]
[61] Bonventre, J.V., Vaidya, V.S., Schmouder, R., Feig, P. and Dieterle, F. (2010) Next-generation Biomarkers for Detecting Kidney Toxicity. Nature Biotechnology, 28, 436-440.[CrossRef]
[62] Fallahzadeh, A., Mahmoodi, T., Kwon, S., Liu, M. and Nolan, A. (2026) Multi-Omics of Oxidative Stress and Particulate Matter Exposure: A Systematic Review. Respiratory Research, 27, Article No. 47.[CrossRef]
[63] Andersson, U. and Tracey, K.J. (2011) HMGB1 Is a Therapeutic Target for Sterile Inflammation and Infection. Annual Review of Immunology, 29, 139-162.[CrossRef]
[64] Yan, A., Cao, T., Li, X., Li, X., Cui, C. and Wang, X. (2025) NLRP3-Mediated PANoptosis and Associated Interventions in Endothelial Injury. Cardiovascular Toxicology, 25, 1222-1235.[CrossRef]
[65] Xu, Z., Wang, W., Liu, Q., Li, Z., Lei, L., Ren, L., et al. (2022) Association between Gaseous Air Pollutants and Biomarkers of Systemic Inflammation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Environmental Pollution, 292, Article ID: 118336.[CrossRef]
[66] Yang, H., Antoine, D.J., Andersson, U. and Tracey, K.J. (2013) The Many Faces of HMGB1: Molecular Structure-Functional Activity in Inflammation, Apoptosis, and Chemotaxis. Journal of Leukocyte Biology, 93, 865-873.[CrossRef]
[67] Venereau, E., De Leo, F., Mezzapelle, R., Careccia, G., Musco, G. and Bianchi, M.E. (2016) HMGB1 as Biomarker and Drug Target. Pharmacological Research, 111, 534-544.[CrossRef]
[68] Wang, Y., Jiang, Z., Yan, J. and Ying, S. (2019) HMGB1 as a Potential Biomarker and Therapeutic Target for Malignant Mesothelioma. Disease Markers, 2019, Article ID: 4183157.[CrossRef]
[69] Kondati, R., Thakur, M., Mutyala, D., Dorsey, W. and Batra, S. (2026) Persistent Environmental Toxicants PCP, TCHQ, and HCB Drive Panoptosis and RNA Granule Remodeling in Human Lung Epithelial Cells. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, 121, Article ID: 104862.[CrossRef]
[70] Xie, H., Zhao, J., Chen, J., Li, R., Li, H., Wu, Q., et al. (2025) MPTP Controls the Release of mtDNA and Induces Endothelial Cell Panoptosis in Trichloroethylene-Induced Immune Kidney Injury. European Journal of Pharmacology, 1005, Article ID: 178118.[CrossRef]
[71] Vaidya, V.S., Ferguson, M.A. and Bonventre, J.V. (2008) Biomarkers of Acute Kidney Injury. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, 48, 463-493.[CrossRef]
[72] Niedzwiecki, M.M., Walker, D.I., Vermeulen, R., Chadeau-Hyam, M., Jones, D.P. and Miller, G.W. (2019) The Exposome: Molecules to Populations. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, 59, 107-127.[CrossRef]
[73] Cui, Y., Balshaw, D.M., Kwok, R.K., Thompson, C.L., Collman, G.W. and Birnbaum, L.S. (2016) The Exposome: Embracing the Complexity for Discovery in Environmental Health. Environmental Health Perspectives, 124, A137-A140.[CrossRef]
[74] Baccarelli, A. and Bollati, V. (2009) Epigenetics and Environmental Chemicals. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 21, 243-251.[CrossRef]
[75] Sobral, A.F., Cunha, A., Costa, I., Silva-Carvalho, M., Silva, R. and Barbosa, D.J. (2025) Environmental Xenobiotics and Epigenetic Modifications: Implications for Human Health and Disease. Journal of Xenobiotics, 15, Article 118.[CrossRef]
[76] Sinha, B.K. (2025) Ferroptosis in Toxicology: Present and Future. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 26, Article 6658.[CrossRef]
[77] Chen, H., Liu, B., Xu, P., Wang, H., Guo, X., Liu, G., et al. (2025) Mechanistic Role of Environmental Toxicants in Inducing Cellular Ferroptosis and Its Associated Diseases. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 298, Article ID: 118269.[CrossRef]
[78] Stockwell, B.R., Friedmann Angeli, J.P., Bayir, H., Bush, A.I., Conrad, M., Dixon, S.J., et al. (2017) Ferroptosis: A Regulated Cell Death Nexus Linking Metabolism, Redox Biology, and Disease. Cell, 171, 273-285.[CrossRef]
[79] Dixon, S.J., Lemberg, K.M., Lamprecht, M.R., Skouta, R., Zaitsev, E.M., Gleason, C.E., et al. (2012) Ferroptosis: An Iron-Dependent Form of Nonapoptotic Cell Death. Cell, 149, 1060-1072.[CrossRef]
[80] Zhang, X., Hua, Z., Lu, Z., Wang, B., Wang, P., Zhang, S., et al. (2026) Overview of Ferroptosis in Cadmium Toxicity. Biological Trace Element Research, 204, 2467-2484.[CrossRef]
[81] Zota, A.R. and VanNoy, B.N. (2021) Integrating Intersectionality into the Exposome Paradigm: A Novel Approach to Racial Inequities in Uterine Fibroids. American Journal of Public Health, 111, 104-109.[CrossRef]
[82] Kolawole, O., Elzein, A. and Marczylo, T. (2026) Exposomics as a Discovery Engine for Emerging Contaminants and Hidden Biological Risks. Emerging Contaminants, 12, Article ID: 100619.[CrossRef]
[83] Blank-Porat, D. and Amster, E. (2023) Effect Biomarkers of Nanoparticle-Exposed Workers: A Scoping Review. Toxicology and Industrial Health, 39, 537-563.[CrossRef]
[84] Pope, C.A., Coleman, N., Pond, Z.A. and Burnett, R.T. (2020) Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Human Mortality: 25+ Years of Cohort Studies. Environmental Research, 183, Article ID: 108924.[CrossRef]
[85] Brunekreef, B. and Holgate, S.T. (2002) Air Pollution and Health. The Lancet, 360, 1233-1242.[CrossRef]
[86] Romanello, M., Di Napoli, C., Drummond, P., Green, C., Kennard, H., Lampard, P., et al. (2022) The 2022 Report of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change: Health at the Mercy of Fossil Fuels. The Lancet, 400, 1619-1654.[CrossRef]
[87] Smith, K., Pochon, X., Melvin, S., Wheeler, T. and Tremblay, L. (2025) Integration of “Omics”-Based Approaches in Environmental Risk Assessment to Establish Cause and Effect Relationships: A Review. Toxics, 13, Article 714.[CrossRef]
[88] Wang, S., Song, R., Xu, Z., Chen, M., Di Tanna, G.L., Downey, L., et al. (2024) The Costs, Health and Economic Impact of Air Pollution Control Strategies: A Systematic Review. Global Health Research and Policy, 9, Article No. 30.[CrossRef]
[89] Udom, G.J., Iyaye, D., Oritsemuelebi, B., Nwanaforo, E., Bede-Ojimadu, O., Abdulai, P.M., et al. (2025) Public Health Concerns of Multifaceted Exposures to Metal and Metalloid Mixtures: A Systematic Review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 197, Article No. 502.[CrossRef]
[90] Henderson, P., Hale, T.W., Shum, S. and Habersang, R.W. (1985) N-Acetylcysteine Therapy of Acute Heavy Metal Poisoning in Mice. Veterinary and Human Toxicology, 27, 522-525.
[91] Osburn, W. and Kensler, T. (2008) NRF2 Signaling: An Adaptive Response Pathway for Protection against Environmental Toxic Insults. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research, 659, 31-39.[CrossRef]
[92] Cuadrado, A., Rojo, A.I., Wells, G., Hayes, J.D., Cousin, S.P., Rumsey, W.L., et al. (2019) Therapeutic Targeting of the NRF2 and KEAP1 Partnership in Chronic Diseases. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 18, 295-317.[CrossRef]
[93] Goshtasbi, H., Hashemzadeh, N., Fathi, M., Movafeghi, A., Barar, J. and Omidi, Y. (2025) Mitigating Oxidative Stress Toxicities of Environmental Pollutants by Antioxidant Nanoformulations. Nano TransMed, 4, Article ID: 100087.[CrossRef]
[94] Shi, Q., Wu, Q., Fang, F., Chen, Y. and Dong, N. (2025) Protective Effect of Glycyrrhizin, a Direct HMGB1 Inhibitor, on Particulate Matter-Induced Lung Injury via Suppression of NF-κB Signaling and Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 778, Article ID: 152392.[CrossRef]
[95] Vermeulen, R., Schymanski, E.L., Barabási, A. and Miller, G.W. (2020) The Exposome and Health: Where Chemistry Meets Biology. Science, 367, 392-396.[CrossRef]
[96] Johansson, H., Mersha, T.B., Brandt, E.B. and Khurana Hershey, G.K. (2019) Interactions between Environmental Pollutants and Genetic Susceptibility in Asthma Risk. Current Opinion in Immunology, 60, 156-162.[CrossRef]
[97] Yu, N., Pang, S., Li, Y. and Diao, H. (2026) Integrated Microbiome-Metabolome Analysis Reveals Multiorgan Toxicity of 1-Nitropyrene and the Limited Efficacy of Ferroptosis Inhibitor FER-1 in Rats. Frontiers in Toxicology, 8, Article 1771766.[CrossRef]
[98] Zhang, L., Luo, Y.L., Xiang, Y., Bai, X.Y., Qiang, R.R., Zhang, X., et al. (2024) Ferroptosis Inhibitors: Past, Present and Future. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 15, Article 1407335.[CrossRef]
[99] Rudén, C. (2003) Scrutinizing ACGIH Risk Assessments: The Trichloroethylene Case. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 44, 207-213.[CrossRef]
[100] Marx, U. (2020) Biology-Inspired Microphysiological Systems to Advance Medicines for Patient Benefit and Animal Welfare. ALTEX, 37, 365-394.[CrossRef]
[101] Patel, C.J., Bhattacharya, J. and Butte, A.J. (2010) An Environment-Wide Association Study (EWAS) on Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. PLOS ONE, 5, e10746.[CrossRef]
[102] Krewski, D., Andersen, M.E., Tyshenko, M.G., Krishnan, K., Hartung, T., Boekelheide, K., et al. (2020) Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: Progress in the Past Decade and Future Perspectives. Archives of Toxicology, 94, 1-58.[CrossRef]
[103] Cho, S. and Yoon, J. (2017) Organ-on-a-Chip for Assessing Environmental Toxicants. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 45, 34-42.[CrossRef]
[104] Villeneuve, D.L., Crump, D., Garcia-Reyero, N., Hecker, M., Hutchinson, T.H., LaLone, C.A., et al. (2014) Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) Development I: Strategies and Principles. Toxicological Sciences, 142, 312-320.[CrossRef]
[105] Seal, S., Mahale, M., García-Ortegón, M., Joshi, C.K., Hosseini-Gerami, L., Beatson, A., et al. (2025) Machine Learning for Toxicity Prediction Using Chemical Structures: Pillars for Success in the Real World. Chemical Research in Toxicology, 38, 759-807.[CrossRef]
[106] Abdel-Magid, A.F. (2025) Receptor-Interacting Protein Kinase 1 (RIPK1) Inhibitors as Potential Treatment for Several Inflammatory and Neurodegenerative Diseases. ACS Medicinal Chemistry Letters, 16, 204-206.[CrossRef]

Copyright © 2026 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.