Literature DB >> 31794061

Quantitative Interpretation of Genetic Toxicity Dose-Response Data for Risk Assessment and Regulatory Decision-Making: Current Status and Emerging Priorities.

Paul A White1, Alexandra S Long2, George E Johnson3.   

Abstract

The screen-and-bin approach for interpretation of genotoxicity data is predicated on three false assumptions: that genotoxicants are rare, that genotoxicity dose-response functions do not contain a low-dose region mechanistically characterized by zero-order kinetics, and that genotoxicity is not a bona fide toxicological endpoint. Consequently, there is a need to develop and implement quantitative methods to interpret genotoxicity dose-response data for risk assessment and regulatory decision-making. Standardized methods to analyze dose-response data, and determine point-of-departure (PoD) metrics, have been established; the most robust PoD is the benchmark dose (BMD). However, there are no standards for regulatory interpretation of mutagenicity BMDs. Although 5-10% is often used as a critical effect size (CES) for BMD determination, values for genotoxicity endpoints have not been established. The use of BMDs to determine health-based guidance values (HBGVs) requires assessment factors (AFs) to account for interspecies differences and variability in human sensitivity. Default AFs used for other endpoints may not be appropriate for interpretation of in vivo mutagenicity BMDs. Analyses of published dose-response data showing the effects of compensatory pathway deficiency indicate that AFs for sensitivity differences should be in the range of 2-20. Additional analyses indicate that the AF to compensate for short treatment durations should be in the range of 5-15. Future work should use available data to empirically determine endpoint-specific CES values; similarly, to determine AF values for BMD adjustment. Future work should also evaluate the ability to use in vitro dose-response data for risk assessment, and the utility of probabilistic methods for determination of mutagenicity HBGVs. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 61:66-83, 2020.
© 2019 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. © 2019 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.

Entities:  

Keywords:  benchmark dose; dose-response analysis; risk assessment

Year:  2019        PMID: 31794061     DOI: 10.1002/em.22351

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


  6 in total

1.  Comparative potency analysis of whole smoke solutions in the bacterial reverse mutation test.

Authors:  Fanxue Meng; Nan Mei; Jian Yan; Xiaoqing Guo; Patricia A Richter; Tao Chen; Mamata De
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2021-08-27       Impact factor: 3.000

2.  Dose-response genotoxicity of triclosan in mice: an estimate of acceptable daily intake based on organ toxicity.

Authors:  Yiyi Cao; Jing Xi; Xinyue You; Weiying Liu; Yang Luan
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 3.524

3.  Comprehensive interpretation of in vitro micronucleus test results for 292 chemicals: from hazard identification to risk assessment application.

Authors:  Byron Kuo; Marc A Beal; John W Wills; Paul A White; Francesco Marchetti; Andy Nong; Tara S Barton-Maclaren; Keith Houck; Carole L Yauk
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 6.168

4.  The 28 + 28 day design is an effective sampling time for analyzing mutant frequencies in rapidly proliferating tissues of MutaMouse animals.

Authors:  Francesco Marchetti; Gu Zhou; Danielle LeBlanc; Paul A White; Andrew Williams; Carole L Yauk; George R Douglas
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 5.153

5.  Anti-schistosomal activities of quinoxaline-containing compounds: From hit identification to lead optimisation.

Authors:  Gilda Padalino; Nelly El-Sakkary; Lawrence J Liu; Chenxi Liu; Danielle S G Harte; Rachel E Barnes; Edward Sayers; Josephine Forde-Thomas; Helen Whiteland; Marcella Bassetto; Salvatore Ferla; George Johnson; Arwyn T Jones; Conor R Caffrey; Iain Chalmers; Andrea Brancale; Karl F Hoffmann
Journal:  Eur J Med Chem       Date:  2021-09-10       Impact factor: 6.514

6.  Duplex sequencing identifies genomic features that determine susceptibility to benzo(a)pyrene-induced in vivo mutations.

Authors:  Danielle P M LeBlanc; Matthew Meier; Fang Yin Lo; Elizabeth Schmidt; Charles Valentine; Andrew Williams; Jesse J Salk; Carole L Yauk; Francesco Marchetti
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 4.547

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.