Literature DB >> 18161944

Biomarkers in toxicology and risk assessment: informing critical dose-response relationships.

James A Swenberg1, Elizabeth Fryar-Tita, Yo-Chan Jeong, Gunnar Boysen, Thomas Starr, Vernon E Walker, Richard J Albertini.   

Abstract

Tremendous advances have been made in the study of biomarkers related to carcinogenesis during the past 20 years. This perspective will briefly review improvements in methodology and instrumentation that have increased our abilities to measure the formation, repair, and consequences of DNA adducts. These biomarkers of exposure, along with surrogates such as protein adducts, have greatly improved our understanding of species differences in metabolism and effects of chemical stability and DNA repair on tissue differences in molecular dose. During this same time frame, improvements in assays for biomarkers of effect have provided better data and an improved understanding of the dose responses for both gene and chromosomal mutations. A framework analysis approach was used to examine the mode of action of genotoxic chemicals and the default assumption that cancer can be expected to be linear at very low doses. This analysis showed that biomarkers of exposure are usually linear at low doses, with the exception being when identical adducts are formed endogenously. Whereas biomarkers of exposure extrapolate down to zero, biomarkers of effect can only be interpolated back to the spontaneous or background number of mutations. The likely explanation for this major difference is that at high exposures, the biology that results in mutagenesis is driven by DNA damage resulting from the chemical exposure. In contrast, at very low exposures, the biology that results in mutagenesis is driven by endogenous DNA damage. The shapes of the dose-response curves for biomarkers of exposure and effect can be very different, with biomarkers of effect better informing quantitative estimates of risk for cancer, a disease that results from multiple mutations. It is also clear, however, that low dose data on mutagenesis are needed for many more chemicals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18161944     DOI: 10.1021/tx700408t

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol        ISSN: 0893-228X            Impact factor:   3.739


  37 in total

1.  Aristolactam-DNA adducts are a biomarker of environmental exposure to aristolochic acid.

Authors:  Bojan Jelaković; Sandra Karanović; Ivana Vuković-Lela; Frederick Miller; Karen L Edwards; Jovan Nikolić; Karla Tomić; Neda Slade; Branko Brdar; Robert J Turesky; Želimir Stipančić; Damir Dittrich; Arthur P Grollman; Kathleen G Dickman
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 10.612

Review 2.  Mitochondrial DNA damage and its consequences for mitochondrial gene expression.

Authors:  Susan D Cline
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2012-06-19

3.  Exposure-response of 1,2:3,4-diepoxybutane-specific N-terminal valine adducts in mice and rats after inhalation exposure to 1,3-butadiene.

Authors:  Nadia I Georgieva; Gunnar Boysen; Narisa Bordeerat; Vernon E Walker; James A Swenberg
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Formation of 1,2:3,4-diepoxybutane-specific hemoglobin adducts in 1,3-butadiene exposed workers.

Authors:  Gunnar Boysen; Nadia I Georgieva; Narisa K Bordeerat; Radim J Sram; Pamela Vacek; Richard J Albertini; James A Swenberg
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  Formation, Accumulation, and Hydrolysis of Endogenous and Exogenous Formaldehyde-Induced DNA Damage.

Authors:  Rui Yu; Yongquan Lai; Hadley J Hartwell; Benjamin C Moeller; Melanie Doyle-Eisele; Dean Kracko; Wanda M Bodnar; Thomas B Starr; James A Swenberg
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 4.849

6.  Comparison of three oxidative stress biomarkers in a sample of healthy adults.

Authors:  Joanne L Watters; Jessie A Satia; Kerry-Ann da Costa; Gunnar Boysen; Leonard B Collins; Jason D Morrow; Ginger L Milne; James A Swenberg
Journal:  Biomarkers       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.658

7.  Quantification of acylfulvene- and illudin S-DNA adducts in cells with variable bioactivation capacities.

Authors:  Kathryn E Pietsch; Paul M van Midwoud; Peter W Villalta; Shana J Sturla
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 3.739

8.  Nonlinear cancer response at ultralow dose: a 40800-animal ED(001) tumor and biomarker study.

Authors:  George S Bailey; Ashok P Reddy; Clifford B Pereira; Ulrich Harttig; William Baird; Jan M Spitsbergen; Jerry D Hendricks; Gayle A Orner; David E Williams; James A Swenberg
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.739

Review 9.  Mitochondrial DNA maintenance: an appraisal.

Authors:  Alexander T Akhmedov; José Marín-García
Journal:  Mol Cell Biochem       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 3.396

10.  Application of key events analysis to chemical carcinogens and noncarcinogens.

Authors:  Alan R Boobis; George P Daston; R Julian Preston; Stephen S Olin
Journal:  Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 11.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.