Literature DB >> 11695549

Background and framework for ILSI's collaborative evaluation program on alternative models for carcinogenicity assessment. International Life Sciences Institute.

D E Robinson1, J S MacDonald.   

Abstract

The willingness of the agencies involved in the regulation of pharmaceuticals to accept data from newly proposed models for carcinogenicity testing (eg, transgenic animals, neonatal rodent models, initiation-promotion models) has stimulated international interest in gaining experience and a greater understanding of the strengths and limitations of the specific models. Over a 4-year period, the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Science Institute (HESI) has coordinated a large-scale collaborative research program to help to better characterize the responsiveness of several models proposed for use in carcinogenicity assessment. The overall objective of this partnership among industry, government, and academic scientists was to evaluate the ability of these new models to provide useful information for human cancer risk assessment. This research program reflected a commitment of nearly US$35 million by over 50 industrial, govemment, and academic laboratories from the United States, Europe, and Japan. Evaluation of the models required the development of standardized protocols to allow reproducibility and comparability of data obtained across multiple laboratories. Test compounds were selected on the basis of mechanistically meaningful carcinogenic activity or noncarcinogenicity in the rodent bioassay as well as humans. Criteria were established for dose selection, pathology review, quality control, and for evaluation of study outcome. The database from these studies represents an important contribution to the future application of new models for human cancer risk assessment. Beyond the data, the collaborative process by which the models were evaluated may also represent a prototype for assessing new methods in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11695549     DOI: 10.1080/019262301753178438

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Pathol        ISSN: 0192-6233            Impact factor:   1.902


  8 in total

1.  Improving prediction of carcinogenicity to reduce, refine, and replace the use of experimental animals.

Authors:  Todd Bourcier; Tim McGovern; Lidiya Stavitskaya; Naomi Kruhlak; David Jacobson-Kram
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 2.  The use of genetically modified mice in cancer risk assessment: challenges and limitations.

Authors:  David A Eastmond; Suryanarayana V Vulimiri; John E French; Babasaheb Sonawane
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 5.635

3.  Cell transformation assays for prediction of carcinogenic potential: state of the science and future research needs.

Authors:  Stuart Creton; Marilyn J Aardema; Paul L Carmichael; James S Harvey; Francis L Martin; Robert F Newbold; Michael R O'Donovan; Kamala Pant; Albrecht Poth; Ayako Sakai; Kiyoshi Sasaki; Andrew D Scott; Leonard M Schechtman; Rhine R Shen; Noriho Tanaka; Hemad Yasaei
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 3.000

Review 4.  The role of transgenic mouse models in carcinogen identification.

Authors:  John B Pritchard; John E French; Barbara J Davis; Joseph K Haseman
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  Science, politics, and health in the brave new world of pharmaceutical carcinogenic risk assessment: technical progress or cycle of regulatory capture?

Authors:  John Abraham; Rachel Ballinger
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Stem cell proliferation patterns as an alternative for in vivo prediction and discrimination of carcinogenic compounds.

Authors:  An-Sofie Stevens; Maxime Willems; Michelle Plusquin; Jan-Pieter Ploem; Ellen Winckelmans; Tom Artois; Karen Smeets
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 7.  rasH2 mouse: reproducibility and stability of carcinogenicity due to a standardized production and monitoring system.

Authors:  Hideki Tsutsumi; Ryo Inoue; Masahiko Yasuda; Riichi Takahashi; Masami Suzuki; Koji Urano
Journal:  J Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2021-11-19       Impact factor: 1.628

8.  Survey of tumorigenic sensitivity in 6-month rasH2-Tg mice studies compared with 2-year rodent assays.

Authors:  Shigeru Hisada; Kenjiro Tsubota; Kenji Inoue; Hisaharu Yamada; Takanori Ikeda; Frank D Sistare
Journal:  J Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 1.628

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.