Literature DB >> 16258925

Use of genetic toxicology information for risk assessment.

Kerry L Dearfield1, Martha M Moore.   

Abstract

Genetic toxicology data are used worldwide in regulatory decision-making. On the 25th anniversary of Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis, we think it is important to provide a brief overview of the currently available genetic toxicity tests and to outline a framework for conducting weight-of-the-evidence (WOE) evaluations that optimize the utility of genetic toxicology information for risk assessment. There are two major types of regulatory decisions made by agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA): (1) the approval and registration of pesticides, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and medical-use products, and (2) the setting of standards for acceptable exposure levels in air, water, and food. Genetic toxicology data are utilized for both of these regulatory decisions. The current default assumption for regulatory decisions is that chemicals that are shown to be genotoxic in standard tests are, in fact, capable of causing mutations in humans (in somatic and/or germ cells) and that they contribute to adverse health outcomes via a "genotoxic/mutagenic" mode of action (MOA). The new EPA Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment [Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment, USEPA, 2005, EPA Publication No. EPA/630/P-03/001F] emphasize the use of MOA information in risk assessment and provide a framework to help identify a possible mutagenic and/or nonmutagenic MOA for potential adverse effects. An analysis of the available genetic toxicity data is now, more than ever, a key component to consider in the derivation of an MOA for characterizing observed adverse health outcomes such as cancer. We provide our perspective and a two-step strategy for evaluating genotoxicity data for optimal use in regulatory decision-making. The strategy includes integration of all available information and provides, first, for a WOE analysis as to whether a chemical is a mutagen, and second, whether an adverse health outcome is mediated via a mutagenic MOA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16258925     DOI: 10.1002/em.20176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen        ISSN: 0893-6692            Impact factor:   3.216


  3 in total

1.  Characterization and interlaboratory comparison of a gene expression signature for differentiating genotoxic mechanisms.

Authors:  Heidrun Ellinger-Ziegelbauer; Jennifer M Fostel; Chinami Aruga; Daniel Bauer; Eric Boitier; Shibing Deng; Donna Dickinson; Anne-Celine Le Fevre; Albert J Fornace; Olivier Grenet; Yizhong Gu; Jean-Christophe Hoflack; Masako Shiiyama; Roger Smith; Ronald D Snyder; Catherine Spire; Gotaro Tanaka; Jiri Aubrecht
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2009-05-22       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Human health risks by potentially toxic metals in drinking water along the Hattar Industrial Estate, Pakistan.

Authors:  Shah Jehan; Seema Anjum Khattak; Said Muhammad; Liaqat Ali; Abdur Rashid; Mian Luqman Hussain
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-12-13       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Biopure MTAD Induces DNA Damage but Not Cellular Death: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Juliana Soares Roter Marins; Luciana Moura Sassone; Daniel Araki Ribeiro
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2009-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.