Literature DB >> 14600281

Nonmonotonic dose-response relationships: mechanistic basis, kinetic modeling, and implications for risk assessment.

Rory B Conolly1, Werner K Lutz.   

Abstract

Dose-response curves for the first interaction of a chemical with a biochemical target molecule are usually monotonic; i.e., they increase or decrease over the entire dose range. However, for reactions of a complex biological system to a toxicant, nonmonotonic (biphasic) dose-effect relationships can be observed, showing a decrease at low dose followed by an increase at high dose, or vice versa. We present four examples to demonstrate that nonmonotonic dose-response relationships can result from superimposition of monotonic dose responses of component biological reactions. Examples include (i) a membrane-receptor model with receptor subtypes of different ligand affinity and opposing downstream effects (adenosine receptors A1 vs. A2), (ii) androgen receptor-mediated gene expression driven by homodimers, but not mixed-ligand dimers, (iii) repair of background DNA damage by enzymatic activity induced by adducts formed by a xenobiotic, (iv) rate of mutation as a consequence of DNA damage times rate of cell division, the latter being modulated by cell-cycle delay at low-level DNA damage, and cell-cycle acceleration due to regenerative hyperplasia at cytotoxic dose levels. Quantitative analyses based on biological models are shown, and factors that affect the degree of nonmonotonicity are identified. It is noted that threshold-type dose-response curves could in fact be nonmonotonic. Our analysis should promote a scientific discussion of biphasic dose responses and the concept termed "hormesis," and of default procedures for low-dose extrapolation in toxicological risk assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14600281     DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfh007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Sci        ISSN: 1096-0929            Impact factor:   4.849


  66 in total

1.  Hormetic signaling patterns.

Authors:  Reinhard Wetzker; Ignacio Rubio
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 2.  Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals: low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses.

Authors:  Laura N Vandenberg; Theo Colborn; Tyrone B Hayes; Jerrold J Heindel; David R Jacobs; Duk-Hee Lee; Toshi Shioda; Ana M Soto; Frederick S vom Saal; Wade V Welshons; R Thomas Zoeller; John Peterson Myers
Journal:  Endocr Rev       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 19.871

3.  Computational modeling of signaling pathways mediating cell cycle checkpoint control and apoptotic responses to ionizing radiation-induced DNA damage.

Authors:  Yuchao Zhao; In Chio Lou; Rory B Conolly
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 2.658

4.  Dose-response behavior of the bacterium Vibrio fischeri exposed to pharmaceuticals and personal care products.

Authors:  Sheyla Ortiz de García; Pedro A García-Encina; Rubén Irusta-Mata
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 2.823

5.  A perspective on the scientific, philosophical, and policy dimensions of hormesis.

Authors:  George R Hoffmann
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2009-01-19       Impact factor: 2.658

6.  Phase I to II cross-induction of xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes: a feedforward control mechanism for potential hormetic responses.

Authors:  Qiang Zhang; Jingbo Pi; Courtney G Woods; Melvin E Andersen
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 4.219

7.  Hormesis and adaptive cellular control systems.

Authors:  Qiang Zhang; Jingbo Pi; Courtney G Woods; Annie M Jarabek; Harvey J Clewell; Melvin E Andersen
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 2.658

8.  Two Endogenous Antiangiogenic Inhibitors, Endostatin and Angiostatin, Demonstrate Biphasic Curves in their Antitumor Profiles.

Authors:  Kashi Javaherian; Tong-Young Lee; Robert M Tjin Tham Sjin; George E Parris; Lynn Hlatky
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 9.  Bisphenol-A and the great divide: a review of controversies in the field of endocrine disruption.

Authors:  Laura N Vandenberg; Maricel V Maffini; Carlos Sonnenschein; Beverly S Rubin; Ana M Soto
Journal:  Endocr Rev       Date:  2008-12-12       Impact factor: 19.871

10.  Uncertainties in biologically-based modeling of formaldehyde-induced respiratory cancer risk: identification of key issues.

Authors:  Ravi P Subramaniam; Chao Chen; Kenny S Crump; Danielle Devoney; John F Fox; Christopher J Portier; Paul M Schlosser; Chad M Thompson; Paul White
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2008-06-28       Impact factor: 4.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.