Literature DB >> 16950854

Hormesis outperforms threshold model in National Cancer Institute antitumor drug screening database.

Edward J Calabrese1, John W Staudenmayer, Edward J Stanek, George R Hoffmann.   

Abstract

Which dose-response model best explains low-dose responses is a critical issue in toxicology, pharmacology, and risk assessment. The present paper utilized the U.S. National Cancer Institute yeast screening database that contains 56,914 dose-response studies representing the replicated effects of 2189 chemically diverse possible antitumor drugs on cell proliferation in 13 different yeast strains. Multiple evaluation methods indicated that the observed data are inconsistent with the threshold model while supporting the hormetic model. Hormetic response patterns were observed approximately four times more often than would be expected by chance alone. The data call for the rejection of the threshold model for low-dose prediction, and they support the hormetic model as the default model for scientific interpretation of low-dose toxicological responses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16950854     DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfl098

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


  27 in total

1.  Predicting low dose effects for chemicals in high through-put studies.

Authors:  Edward J Stanek; Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 2.658

2.  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

3.  Hormesis provides a generalized quantitative estimate of biological plasticity.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese; Mark P Mattson
Journal:  J Cell Commun Signal       Date:  2011-02-25       Impact factor: 5.782

4.  A method to evaluate hormesis in nanoparticle dose-responses.

Authors:  Marc A Nascarella; Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-05-28       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  The new radiobiology: returning to our roots.

Authors:  Brant A Ulsh
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-07-15       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 6.  Cellular stress responses, the hormesis paradigm, and vitagenes: novel targets for therapeutic intervention in neurodegenerative disorders.

Authors:  Vittorio Calabrese; Carolin Cornelius; Albena T Dinkova-Kostova; Edward J Calabrese; Mark P Mattson
Journal:  Antioxid Redox Signal       Date:  2010-08-28       Impact factor: 8.401

Review 7.  Hormesis and medicine.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-06-28       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Hormesis: a conversation with a critic.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  EPA's Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts Rules (DBPR) and Northern Kentucky Water: An Economic and Scientific Review.

Authors:  Hugh Henry
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 2.658

10.  Ad hoc and fast forward: the science of hormesis growth and development.

Authors:  Paul Mushak
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-05-20       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.