Jon Sobus

Dr. Jon Sobus


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2020 in Environmental Health Perspectives
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SGShaza Gaballah
Shaza Gaballah
ASAdam Swank
Adam Swank
JSJon Sobus
Jon Sobus
XHXia Meng Howey
Xia Meng Howey
JSJudith Schmid
Judith Schmid
TTTamara Tal
Tamara Tal
Environmental Health Perspectives is an Open Access journal published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Environmental Health Perspectives is an Open Access journal published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

5 March 2019 in Toxicological Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RTRussell S Thomas
Russell S Thomas
TBTina Bahadori
Tina Bahadori
TBTimothy J Buckley
Timothy J Buckley
JCJohn Cowden
John Cowden
CDChad Deisenroth
Chad Deisenroth
Antony J. WilliamsAntony J. Williams
Antony J. Williams
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is faced with the challenge of efficiently and credibly evaluating chemical safety often with limited or no available toxicity data. The expanding number of chemicals found in commerce and the environment, coupled with time and resource requirements for traditional toxicity testing and exposure characterization, continue to underscore the need for new approaches. In 2005, EPA charted a new course to address this challenge by embracing computational toxicology (CompTox) and investing in the technologies and capabilities to push the field forward. The return on this investment has been demonstrated through results and applications across a range of human and environmental health problems, as well as initial application to regulatory decision-making within programs such as the EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. The CompTox initiative at EPA is more than a decade old. This manuscript presents a blueprint to guide the strategic and operational direction over the next 5 years. The primary goal is to obtain broader acceptance of the CompTox approaches for application to higher tier regulatory decisions, such as chemical assessments. To achieve this goal, the blueprint expands and refines the use of high-throughput and computational modeling approaches to transform the components in chemical risk assessment, while systematically addressing key challenges that have hindered progress. In addition, the blueprint outlines additional investments in cross-cutting efforts to characterize uncertainty and variability, develop software and information technology tools, provide outreach and training, and establish scientific confidence for application to different public health and environmental regulatory decisions.

29 December 2017 in Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJon Sobus
Jon Sobus
JWJohn Wambaugh
John Wambaugh
KIKristin K. Isaacs
Kristin K. Isaacs
Antony J. WilliamsAntony J. Williams
Antony J. Williams
AMAndrew McEachran
Andrew McEachran
SNSeth R. Newton
Seth R. Newton
Tens-of-thousands of chemicals are registered in the U.S. for use in countless processes and products. Recent evidence suggests that many of these chemicals are measureable in environmental and/or biological systems, indicating the potential for widespread exposures. Traditional public health research tools, including in vivo studies and targeted analytical chemistry methods, have been unable to meet the needs of screening programs designed to evaluate chemical safety. As such, new tools have been developed to enable rapid assessment of potentially harmful chemical exposures and their attendant biological responses. One group of tools, known as “non-targeted analysis” (NTA) methods, allows the rapid characterization of thousands of never-before-studied compounds in a wide variety of environmental, residential, and biological media. This article discusses current applications of NTA methods, challenges to their effective use in chemical screening studies, and ways in which shared resources (e.g., chemical standards, databases, model predictions, and media measurements) can advance their use in risk-based chemical prioritization. A brief review is provided of resources and projects within EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) that provide benefit to, and receive benefits from, NTA research endeavors. A summary of EPA’s Non-Targeted Analysis Collaborative Trial (ENTACT) is also given, which makes direct use of ORD resources to benefit the global NTA research community. Finally, a research framework is described that shows how NTA methods will bridge chemical prioritization efforts within ORD. This framework exists as a guide for institutions seeking to understand the complexity of chemical exposures, and the impact of these exposures on living systems.

1 March 2016 in Environment International
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JRJulia E. Rager
Julia E. Rager
MSMark J. Strynar
Mark J. Strynar
SLShuang Liang
Shuang Liang
RMRebecca L. McMahen
Rebecca L. McMahen
ARAnn M. Richard
Ann M. Richard
JSJon Sobus
Jon Sobus
There is a growing need in the field of exposure science for monitoring methods that rapidly screen environmental media for suspect contaminants. Measurement and analysis platforms, based on high resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS), now exist to meet this need. Here we describe results of a study that links HRMS data with exposure predictions from the U.S. EPA's ExpoCast™ program and in vitro bioassay data from the U.S. interagency Tox21 consortium. Vacuum dust samples were collected from 56 households across the U.S. as part of the American Healthy Homes Survey (AHHS). Sample extracts were analyzed using liquid chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry (LC-TOF/MS) with electrospray ionization. On average, approximately 2000 molecular features were identified per sample (based on accurate mass) in negative ion mode, and 3000 in positive ion mode. Exact mass, isotope distribution, and isotope spacing were used to match molecular features with a unique listing of chemical formulas extracted from EPA's Distributed Structure-Searchable Toxicity (DSSTox) database. A total of 978 DSSTox formulas were consistent with the dust LC-TOF/molecular feature data (match score≥90); these formulas mapped to 3228 possible chemicals in the database. Correct assignment of a unique chemical to a given formula required additional validation steps. Each suspect chemical was prioritized for follow-up confirmation using abundance and detection frequency results, along with exposure and bioactivity estimates from ExpoCast and Tox21, respectively. Chemicals with elevated exposure and/or toxicity potential were further examined using a mixture of 100 chemical standards. A total of 33 chemicals were confirmed present in the dust samples by formula and retention time match; nearly half of these do not appear to have been associated with house dust in the published literature. Chemical matches found in at least 10 of the 56 dust samples include Piperine, N,N-Diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET), Triclocarban, Diethyl phthalate (DEP), Propylparaben, Methylparaben, Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl)phosphate (TDCPP), and Nicotine. This study demonstrates a novel suspect screening methodology to prioritize chemicals of interest for subsequent targeted analysis. The methods described here rely on strategic integration of available public resources and should be considered in future non-targeted and suspect screening assessments of environmental and biological media.

6 December 2018 in Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EUElin M. Ulrich
Elin M. Ulrich
JSJon Sobus
Jon Sobus
CGChristopher M. Grulke
Christopher M. Grulke
ARAnn M. Richard
Ann M. Richard
SNSeth R. Newton
Seth R. Newton
Antony J. WilliamsAntony J. Williams
Antony J. Williams

1 March 2018 in Environmental Pollution
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SNSeth R. Newton
Seth R. Newton
RMRebecca L. McMahen
Rebecca L. McMahen
JSJon Sobus
Jon Sobus
KMKamel Mansouri
Kamel Mansouri
Antony J. WilliamsAntony J. Williams
Antony J. Williams
MSMark J. Strynar
Mark J. Strynar