Literature DB >> 10051416

A comprehensive approach for integration of toxicity and cancer risk assessments.

B E Butterworth1, M S Bogdanffy.   

Abstract

Experimental observations and theoretical considerations indicate a dose threshold for most chemically induced noncancer toxic effects below which the increased risk of toxicity is zero. Thus, the historical approach for minimizing risk from toxic chemicals has been to experimentally determine a no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and then to apply safety or uncertainty factors to estimate a dose not expected to produce that toxic effect in humans. In contrast, for radiation and chemically induced cancer, it has been assumed that all agents operate by a genotoxic mode of action and that some risk can be assigned to even vanishingly small doses. Accordingly, risk assessments for carcinogens have commonly been based on the assumption that the tumor dose-response curve at low doses is linear and passes through the origin. Mode of action is defined as a fundamental obligatory step in the induction of toxicity or cancer. It is now clear that tumor induction can arise in a variety of ways including not only a DNA-reactive genotoxic mode of action, but also non-DNA-reactive nongenotoxic-cytotoxic and nongenotoxic-mitogenic modes of action. Initial risk assessment approaches that recognized this distinction identified a chemical carcinogen as either genotoxic or nongenotoxic, with no middle ground. The realization that there is a continuum whereby different chemicals can act by a combination of modes of action and the recent explosion of research into molecular mechanisms of carcinogenesis indicate that all relevant information should be integrated into the risk assessment process on a case by case basis. A comprehensive approach to risk assessment demands that default assumptions be replaced with an integrated understanding of the rate-limiting steps in the induction of toxicity or cancer along with quantitative measures of the shapes of those dose-response curves. The examples of more contemporary risk assessments are presented for chloroform and vinyl acetate. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10051416     DOI: 10.1006/rtph.1998.1273

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  9 in total

1.  Halothane, a novel solvent for the preparation of liposomes containing 2-4'-amino-3'-methylphenyl benzothiazole (AMPB), an anticancer drug: a technical note.

Authors:  Yingqing Ran; Samuel H Yalkowsky
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.246

2.  Low-dose radiation and genotoxic chemicals can protect against stochastic biological effects.

Authors:  Bobby R Scott; Dale M Walker; Vernon E Walker
Journal:  Nonlinearity Biol Toxicol Med       Date:  2004-07

Review 3.  Hazardous air pollutants and asthma.

Authors:  George D Leikauf
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 9.031

4.  Prediction of rodent nongenotoxic carcinogenesis: evaluation of biochemical and tissue changes in rodents following exposure to nine nongenotoxic NTP carcinogens.

Authors:  Clifford R Elcombe; Jenny Odum; John R Foster; Susan Stone; Susan Hasmall; Anthony R Soames; Ian Kimber; John Ashby
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  Occurrence, Ecological and Human Health Risks, and Seasonal Variations of Phenolic Compounds in Surface Water and Sediment of a Potential Polluted River Basin in China.

Authors:  Mo Zhou; Jiquan Zhang; Caiyun Sun
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Comment on "Disinfection Byproducts in Drinking Water and Evaluation of Potential Health Risks of Long-Term Exposure in Nigeria".

Authors:  James Grellier
Journal:  J Environ Public Health       Date:  2018-02-20

7.  Preventive effect of the flavonoid, quercetin, on hepatic cancer in rats via oxidant/antioxidant activity: molecular and histological evidences.

Authors:  Alaaeddeen M Seufi; Safinz S Ibrahim; Tarek K Elmaghraby; Elsayed E Hafez
Journal:  J Exp Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-06-11

8.  Risk of birth defects in Australian communities with high levels of brominated disinfection by-products.

Authors:  Kimberley Chisholm; Angus Cook; Carol Bower; Philip Weinstein
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 9.  Evaluating Evidence for Association of Human Bladder Cancer with Drinking-Water Chlorination Disinfection By-Products.

Authors:  Steve E Hrudey; Lorraine C Backer; Andrew R Humpage; Stuart W Krasner; Dominique S Michaud; Lee E Moore; Philip C Singer; Benjamin D Stanford
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 6.393

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.