Literature DB >> 3375501

Interspecific scaling of toxicity data.

C C Travis1, R K White.   

Abstract

This paper reexamines the scaling approaches used in cancer risk assessment and proposes a more precise body weight scaling factor. Two approaches are conventionally used in scaling exposure and dose from experimental animals to man: body weight scaling (used by FDA) and surface area scaling (BW0.67--used by EPA). This paper reanalyzes the Freireich et al. (1966) study of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 14 anticancer agents in mice, rats, dogs, monkeys, and humans, the dataset most commonly cited as justification for surface area extrapolation. This examination was augmented with an analysis of a similar dataset by Schein et al. (1970) of the MTD of 13 additional chemotherapy agents. The reanalysis shows that BW0.75 is a more appropriate scaling factor for the 27 direct-acting compounds in this dataset.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3375501     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01158.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  11 in total

1.  Using comparative ecotoxicology to develop quantitative species sensitivity relationships (QSSR).

Authors:  J Notenboom; M A Vaal; J A Hoekstra
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Scaling toxicity data across species.

Authors:  W R Chappell
Journal:  Environ Geochem Health       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 4.609

3.  Translational considerations for cancer nanomedicine.

Authors:  Stephan T Stern; Jennifer B Hall; Lee L Yu; Laura J Wood; Giulio F Paciotti; Lawrence Tamarkin; Stephen E Long; Scott E McNeil
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2010-04-10       Impact factor: 9.776

4.  Binge alcohol consumption 18 h after induction of sepsis in a mouse model causes rapid overgrowth of bacteria, a cytokine storm, and decreased survival.

Authors:  Minny Bhatty; Wei Tan; Maria Basco; Stephen Pruett; Bindu Nanduri
Journal:  Alcohol       Date:  2016-11-27       Impact factor: 2.405

Review 5.  Normalisation of anti-cancer drug dosage using body weight and surface area: is it worthwhile? A review of theoretical and practical considerations.

Authors:  J J Reilly; P Workman
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

6.  Epidemiology and quantitative risk assessment: a bridge from science to policy.

Authors:  I Hertz-Picciotto
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Dosage scaling of alcohol in binge exposure models in mice: An empirical assessment of the relationship between dose, alcohol exposure, and peak blood concentrations in humans and mice.

Authors:  Stephen Pruett; Wei Tan; George E Howell; Bindu Nanduri
Journal:  Alcohol       Date:  2020-04-04       Impact factor: 2.405

Review 8.  Applications of physiologic pharmacokinetic modeling in carcinogenic risk assessment.

Authors:  D Krewski; J R Withey; L F Ku; M E Andersen
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Age-related differences in susceptibility to carcinogenesis: a quantitative analysis of empirical animal bioassay data.

Authors:  Dale Hattis; Robert Goble; Abel Russ; Margaret Chu; Jen Ericson
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 10.  Scaling basic toxicokinetic parameters from rat to man.

Authors:  K Bachmann; D Pardoe; D White
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.