Literature DB >> 15129023

Human carcinogenic risk evaluation: an alternative approach to the two-year rodent bioassay.

Samuel M Cohen1.   

Abstract

An approach to the evaluation of carcinogenic risk resulting from exposure to a given chemical is presented in place of a reliance on two-year rodent bioassays. An emphasis is placed on evaluation of the potential DNA reactivity or increased cell proliferation that can be produced by a chemical. The special cases of immunosuppressive and estrogenic chemicals are considered. These evaluations are proposed to involve a combination of in vitro assays, computerized models, and short-term (up to 13 weeks) bioassays in rodents. The emphasis is on mechanistic understanding and evaluation of the dose response and relevance to humans.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15129023     DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfh159

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


  12 in total

Review 1.  Case examples of an evaluation of the human relevance of the pyrethroids/pyrethrins-induced liver tumours in rodents based on the mode of action.

Authors:  Tomoya Yamada
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 3.524

2.  Screening for human urinary bladder carcinogens: two-year bioassay is unnecessary.

Authors:  Samuel M Cohen
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 3.524

3.  Cancer Prevention and Treatment by Wholistic Nutrition.

Authors:  T Colin Campbell
Journal:  J Nat Sci       Date:  2017-10

4.  From the Cover: Genomic Effects of Androstenedione and Sex-Specific Liver Cancer Susceptibility in Mice.

Authors:  John P Rooney; Natalia Ryan; Brian N Chorley; Susan D Hester; Elaina M Kenyon; Judith E Schmid; Barbara Jane George; Michael F Hughes; Yusupha M Sey; Alan Tennant; Denise K MacMillan; Jane Ellen Simmons; Charlene A McQueen; Arun Pandiri; Charles E Wood; J Christopher Corton
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  Biological Basis of Differential Susceptibility to Hepatocarcinogenesis among Mouse Strains.

Authors:  Robert R Maronpot
Journal:  J Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2009-04-06       Impact factor: 1.628

Review 6.  Prediction of the Carcinogenic Potential of Human Pharmaceuticals Using Repeated Dose Toxicity Data and Their Pharmacological Properties.

Authors:  Jan Willem van der Laan; Wenny H W Buitenhuis; Laura Wagenaar; Ans E M F Soffers; Eugene P van Someren; Cyrille A M Krul; Ruud A Woutersen
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2016-10-14

7.  Establishment of a bioluminescence model for microenvironmentally induced oral carcinogenesis with implications for screening bioengineered scaffolds.

Authors:  Salwa Suliman; Himalaya Parajuli; Yang Sun; Anne Christine Johannessen; Anna Finne-Wistrand; Emmet McCormack; Kamal Mustafa; Daniela Elena Costea
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 3.147

8.  Longer rodent bioassay fails to address 2-year bioassay's flaws.

Authors:  Joseph Manuppello; Catherine Willett
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 9.  Critical role of toxicologic pathology in a short-term screen for carcinogenicity.

Authors:  Samuel M Cohen; Lora L Arnold
Journal:  J Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 1.628

Review 10.  Sucralose Non-Carcinogenicity: A Review of the Scientific and Regulatory Rationale.

Authors:  Colin Berry; David Brusick; Samuel M Cohen; Jerry F Hardisty; V Lee Grotz; Gary M Williams
Journal:  Nutr Cancer       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 2.900

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.