Literature DB >> 18213650

Recent developments in frameworks to consider human relevance of hypothesized modes of action for tumours in animals.

M E Bette Meek1.   

Abstract

This paper summarizes recent developments in the continuing evolution of Human Relevance Frameworks to systematically consider the weight of evidence of hypothesized modes of action in animals and their potential human relevance for both cancer and non-cancer effects. These frameworks have been developed in initiatives of the International Life Sciences Institute Risk Sciences Institute and the International Programme on Chemical Safety engaging large numbers of scientists internationally. They are analytical tools designed to organize information in hazard characterization as a basis to clarify the extent of the weight of evidence for mode of action in animals and human relevance and subsequent implications for dose-response. They are also extremely helpful in identifying critical data gaps. These frameworks which are illustrated by an increasing number of case studies, have been widely adopted into international and national guidance and assessments and continue to evolve, as experience increases in their application. Published 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18213650     DOI: 10.1002/em.20369

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  The PPARα-dependent rodent liver tumor response is not relevant to humans: addressing misconceptions.

Authors:  J Christopher Corton; Jeffrey M Peters; James E Klaunig
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 5.153

Review 2.  Developing and applying the adverse outcome pathway concept for understanding and predicting neurotoxicity.

Authors:  Anna Bal-Price; Pamela J Lein; Kimberly P Keil; Sunjay Sethi; Timothy Shafer; Marta Barenys; Ellen Fritsche; Magdalini Sachana; M E Bette Meek
Journal:  Neurotoxicology       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 4.294

Review 3.  Weight of Evidence for Hazard Identification: A Critical Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Pierre Martin; Claire Bladier; Bette Meek; Olivier Bruyere; Eve Feinblatt; Mathilde Touvier; Laurence Watier; David Makowski
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2018-07-17       Impact factor: 9.031

4.  Pragmatic challenges for the vision of toxicity testing in the 21st century in a regulatory context: another Ames test? ...or a new edition of "the Red Book"?

Authors:  Bette Meek; John Doull
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 5.  Advancing human health risk assessment: integrating recent advisory committee recommendations.

Authors:  Michael Dourson; Richard A Becker; Lynne T Haber; Lynn H Pottenger; Tiffany Bredfeldt; Penelope A Fenner-Crisp
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.635

Review 6.  Mode of action human relevance (species concordance) framework: Evolution of the Bradford Hill considerations and comparative analysis of weight of evidence.

Authors:  M E Bette Meek; Christine M Palermo; Ammie N Bachman; Colin M North; R Jeffrey Lewis
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 3.446

Review 7.  New developments in the evolution and application of the WHO/IPCS framework on mode of action/species concordance analysis.

Authors:  M E Meek; A Boobis; I Cote; V Dellarco; G Fotakis; S Munn; J Seed; C Vickers
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 3.446

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.