Literature DB >> 30634023

Chemical carcinogenicity revisited 1: A unified theory of carcinogenicity based on contemporary knowledge.

Douglas C Wolf1, Samuel M Cohen2, Alan R Boobis3, Vicki L Dellarco4, Penelope A Fenner-Crisp5, Angelo Moretto6, Timothy P Pastoor7, Rita S Schoeny8, Jennifer G Seed9, John E Doe10.   

Abstract

Developments in the understanding of the etiology of cancer have profound implications for the way the carcinogenicity of chemicals is addressed. This paper proposes a unified theory of carcinogenesis that will illuminate better ways to evaluate and regulate chemicals. In the last four decades, we have come to understand that for a cell and a group of cells to begin the process of unrestrained growth that is defined as cancer, there must be changes in DNA that reprogram the cell from normal to abnormal. Cancer is the consequence of DNA coding errors that arise either directly from mutagenic events or indirectly from cell proliferation especially if sustained. Chemicals that act via direct interaction with DNA can induce cancer because they cause mutations which can be carried forward in dividing cells. Chemicals that act via non-genotoxic mechanisms must be dosed to maintain a proliferative environment so that the steps toward neoplasia have time to occur. Chemicals that induce increased cellular proliferation can be divided into two categories: those which act by a cellular receptor to induce cellular proliferation, and those which act via non-specific mechanisms such as cytotoxicity. This knowledge has implications for testing chemicals for carcinogenic potential and risk management.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Carcinogenicity; Mode of action; Risk assessment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30634023     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.01.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  8 in total

Review 1.  Mode of action-based risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens.

Authors:  Andrea Hartwig; Michael Arand; Bernd Epe; Sabine Guth; Gunnar Jahnke; Alfonso Lampen; Hans-Jörg Martus; Bernhard Monien; Ivonne M C M Rietjens; Simone Schmitz-Spanke; Gerlinde Schriever-Schwemmer; Pablo Steinberg; Gerhard Eisenbrand
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 5.153

2.  A cross-sector call to improve carcinogenicity risk assessment through use of genomic methodologies.

Authors:  Carole L Yauk; Alison H Harrill; Heidrun Ellinger-Ziegelbauer; Jan Willem van der Laan; Jonathan Moggs; Roland Froetschl; Frank Sistare; Syril Pettit
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 3.  The modification of cancer risk by chemicals.

Authors:  David J Harrison; John E Doe
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 2.680

4.  A graph neural network approach for molecule carcinogenicity prediction.

Authors:  Philip Fradkin; Adamo Young; Lazar Atanackovic; Brendan Frey; Leo J Lee; Bo Wang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 6.931

5.  Chemical carcinogen safety testing: OECD expert group international consensus on the development of an integrated approach for the testing and assessment of chemical non-genotoxic carcinogens.

Authors:  Miriam N Jacobs; Annamaria Colacci; Raffaella Corvi; Monica Vaccari; M Cecilia Aguila; Marco Corvaro; Nathalie Delrue; Daniel Desaulniers; Norman Ertych; Abigail Jacobs; Mirjam Luijten; Federica Madia; Akiyoshi Nishikawa; Kumiko Ogawa; Kiyomi Ohmori; Martin Paparella; Anoop Kumar Sharma; Paule Vasseur
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2020-06-27       Impact factor: 5.153

6.  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

7.  A new approach to the classification of carcinogenicity.

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:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 6.168

8.  A framework for chemical safety assessment incorporating new approach methodologies within REACH.

Authors:  Nicholas Ball; Remi Bars; Philip A Botham; Andreea Cuciureanu; Mark T D Cronin; John E Doe; Tatsiana Dudzina; Timothy W Gant; Marcel Leist; Bennard van Ravenzwaay
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 5.153

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.