Literature DB >> 21609253

Reproductive toxicants have a threshold of adversity.

Aldert H Piersma1, Lya G Hernandez, Jan van Benthem, J J Andre Muller, F X Rolaf van Leeuwen, Theo G Vermeire, Marcel T M van Raaij.   

Abstract

This paper surveys the scientific basis for the current threshold approach for reproductive hazard and risk assessment. In some regulatory areas it was recently suggested to consider reproductive toxicants under the stringent linear extrapolation risk assessment paradigm that was developed for genotoxic carcinogens. First, the current risk assessment paradigm for genotoxic carcinogens is addressed, followed by an overview of reproductive toxicology and its threshold dose approach for hazard and risk assessment, the testing procedures for assessing the reproductive toxicity of chemicals, and the derivation of conclusions on their risk assessment and Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP). Relevant details of testing methodologies are discussed, such as exposure time windows, parameters determined, and the coverage of the entire reproductive cycle. In addition, the dose-response relationship is considered, illustrated with several examples. It is concluded that the current risk assessment methodology for genotoxic carcinogens is a debatable worst-case scenario and that for risk assessment of reproductive toxicants the threshold dose approach remains valid.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21609253     DOI: 10.3109/10408444.2011.554794

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol        ISSN: 1040-8444            Impact factor:   5.635


  7 in total

1.  Policy decisions on endocrine disruptors should be based on science across disciplines: a response to Dietrich et al.

Authors:  A C Gore; J Balthazart; D Bikle; D O Carpenter; D Crews; P Czernichow; E Diamanti-Kandarakis; R M Dores; D Grattan; P R Hof; A N Hollenberg; C Lange; A V Lee; J E Levine; R P Millar; R J Nelson; M Porta; M Poth; D M Power; G S Prins; E C Ridgway; E F Rissman; J A Romijn; P E Sawchenko; P D Sly; O Söder; H S Taylor; M Tena-Sempere; H Vaudry; K Wallen; Z Wang; L Wartofsky; C S Watson
Journal:  Endocrinology       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 4.736

Review 2.  Dawn of ocular gene therapy: implications for molecular diagnosis in retinal disease.

Authors:  Jacques Zaneveld; Feng Wang; Xia Wang; Rui Chen
Journal:  Sci China Life Sci       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 6.038

3.  Uncertainties in biological responses that influence hazard and risk approaches to the regulation of endocrine active substances.

Authors:  Joanne L Parrott; Poul Bjerregaard; Kristin E Brugger; L Earl Gray; Taisen Iguchi; Sarah M Kadlec; Lennart Weltje; James R Wheeler
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 2.992

Review 4.  Molecular signaling network motifs provide a mechanistic basis for cellular threshold responses.

Authors:  Qiang Zhang; Sudin Bhattacharya; Rory B Conolly; Harvey J Clewell; Norbert E Kaminski; Melvin E Andersen
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  The codification of hazard and its impact on the hazard versus risk controversy.

Authors:  John E Doe; Alan R Boobis; Samuel M Cohen; Vicki L Dellarco; Penelope A Fenner-Crisp; Angelo Moretto; Timothy P Pastoor; Rita S Schoeny; Jennifer G Seed; Douglas C Wolf
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 5.153

6.  C. elegans toxicant responses vary among genetically diverse individuals.

Authors:  Samuel J Widmayer; Timothy A Crombie; Joy N Nyaanga; Kathryn S Evans; Erik C Andersen
Journal:  Toxicology       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 4.571

7.  Derivation of point of departure (PoD) estimates in genetic toxicology studies and their potential applications in risk assessment.

Authors:  G E Johnson; L G Soeteman-Hernández; B B Gollapudi; O G Bodger; K L Dearfield; R H Heflich; J G Hixon; D P Lovell; J T MacGregor; L H Pottenger; C M Thompson; L Abraham; V Thybaud; J Y Tanir; E Zeiger; J van Benthem; P A White
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 3.216

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.