Literature DB >> 3311725

Dose-response relationships for carcinogens: a review.

L Zeise1, R Wilson, E A Crouch.   

Abstract

We review the experimental evidence for various shapes of dose-response relationships for carcinogens and summarize those experiments that give the most information on relatively low doses. A brief review of some models is given to illustrate the shapes of dose-response curve expected from them. Our major interest is in the use of dose-response relationships to estimate risks to humans at low doses, and so we pay special attention to experimentally observed and theoretically expected nonlinearities. There are few experimental examples of nonlinear dose-response relations in humans, but this may simply be due to the limitations in the data. The several examples in rodents, even though for high dose data, suggest that nonlinearity is common. In some cases such nonlinearities may be rationalized on the basis of the pharmacokinetics of the test compound or its metabolites.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3311725      PMCID: PMC1474571          DOI: 10.1289/ehp.8773259

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Health Perspect        ISSN: 0091-6765            Impact factor:   9.031


  126 in total

Review 1.  Quantitative theories of oncogenesis.

Authors:  A S Whittemore
Journal:  Adv Cancer Res       Date:  1978       Impact factor: 6.242

2.  Carcinogenic effects of low dietary levels of aflatoxin B1 in rats.

Authors:  G N Wogan; S Paglialunga; P M Newberne
Journal:  Food Cosmet Toxicol       Date:  1974-10

3.  Weibull distributions for continuous-carcinogenesis experiments.

Authors:  R Peto; P Lee
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1973-09       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Saccharin does not bind to DNA of liver or bladder in the rat.

Authors:  W K Lutz; C Schlatter
Journal:  Chem Biol Interact       Date:  1977-11       Impact factor: 5.192

5.  An improved procedure for low-dose carcinogenic risk assessment from animal data.

Authors:  K S Crump
Journal:  J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 3.567

6.  Is somatic mutation the major mechanism of malignant transformation?

Authors:  H Rubin
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1980-05       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Risk estimates of liver cancer due to aflatoxin exposure from peanuts and peanut products.

Authors:  C R Dichter
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  1984-06       Impact factor: 6.023

8.  Relative potency of chemical carcinogens in rodents.

Authors:  D W Gaylor; J J Chen
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 4.000

9.  Angiosarcoma of the liver: an epidemiologic survey.

Authors:  J Brady; F Liberatore; P Harper; P Greenwald; W Burnett; J N Davies; M Bishop; A Polan; N Vianna
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1977-11       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  A two-stage theory of carcinogenesis in relation to the age distribution of human cancer.

Authors:  P ARMITAGE; R DOLL
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1957-06       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  13 in total

1.  An experimental test of the independent action hypothesis in virus-insect pathosystems.

Authors:  Mark P Zwart; Lia Hemerik; Jenny S Cory; J Arjan G M de Visser; Felix J J A Bianchi; Monique M Van Oers; Just M Vlak; Rolf F Hoekstra; Wopke Van der Werf
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  A meta-analysis of the relation between cumulative exposure to asbestos and relative risk of lung cancer.

Authors:  T L Lash; E A Crouch; L C Green
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 4.402

Review 3.  Chemical contamination of California drinking water.

Authors:  H H Russell; R J Jackson; D P Spath; S A Book
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1987-11

Review 4.  Historical review of the causes of cancer.

Authors:  Clarke Brian Blackadar
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02-10

5.  Disposition, bioavailability, and serum protein binding of pentachlorophenol in the B6C3F1 mouse.

Authors:  B G Reigner; J F Rigod; T N Tozer
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Dose-response relationship for chemical carcinogenesis by genotoxic agents.

Authors:  W K Lutz
Journal:  Soz Praventivmed       Date:  1991

Review 7.  Topics in cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  S S Olin; D A Neumann; J A Foran; G J Scarano
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 8.  A framework for integrated environmental health impact assessment of systemic risks.

Authors:  David J Briggs
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2008-11-27       Impact factor: 5.984

9.  Deviation from additivity in mixture toxicity: relevance of nonlinear dose-response relationships and cell line differences in genotoxicity assays with combinations of chemical mutagens and gamma-radiation.

Authors:  Werner K Lutz; Spyros Vamvakas; Annette Kopp-Schneider; Josef Schlatter; Helga Stopper
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 10.  Dose-response relationship in multistage carcinogenesis: promoters.

Authors:  K T Kitchin; J L Brown; R W Setzer
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.