Literature DB >> 853532

Rationale developed by the Environmental Protection Agency for the assessment of carcinogenic risks.

R E Albert, R E Train, E Anderson.   

Abstract

The intent of the Environmental Protection Agency's "Interim Guideline for Carcinogen Risk Assessment" is to provide an evaluation of the evidence regarding suspect carcinogens that encapsulates judgments on the quality and adequacy of data, the likelihood that the agent is a human carcinogen, and an estimate of the magnitude of the cancer burden that could be ascribed to the agent if no regulatory action were taken. Every effort shoult be made to reduce environmental contamination by carcinogens to the lowest possible level; this view stems from uncertainties about qualitative and quantitative extrapolations from animals to man, the lack of evidence for a dose threshold, the great range of possible interactions among environmental carcinogens and cofactors, and the broad spectrum of human susceptibility. New knowledge in the field of carcinogenesis is developing, and modifications of the Environmental Protection Agency's "Interim Guideline for Carcinogen Risk Assessment" must be made periodically.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1977        PMID: 853532     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/58.5.1537

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  11 in total

Review 1.  Probabilistic exposure analysis for chemical risk characterization.

Authors:  Kenneth T Bogen; Alison C Cullen; H Christopher Frey; Paul S Price
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2009-02-17       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  The problem of estimating safe dose levels in chemical carcinogenesis.

Authors:  J Wahrendorf
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1979-10       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 3.  Arsenic: opportunity for risk assessment.

Authors:  G Stöhrer
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 5.153

Review 4.  Consensus report: mutagenicity and carcinogenicity of car exhausts and coal combustion emissions.

Authors: 
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1983-01       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  Levels and Determinants of DDT and DDE Exposure in the VHEMBE Cohort.

Authors:  Fraser W Gaspar; Jonathan Chevrier; Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá; Jonah M Lipsitt; Dana Boyd Barr; Nina Holland; Riana Bornman; Brenda Eskenazi
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 9.031

6.  The 10th anniversary of the publication of genes and environment: memoir of establishing the Japanese environmental mutagen society and a proposal for a new collaborative study on mutagenic hormesis.

Authors:  Shizuyo Sutou
Journal:  Genes Environ       Date:  2017-03-01

7.  Consideration of the Aerosol Transmission for COVID-19 and Public Health.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Anderson; Paul Turnham; John R Griffin; Chester C Clarke
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 4.000

Review 8.  Human health hazards associated with chemical contamination of aquatic environment.

Authors:  J F Stara; D Kello; P Durkin
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1980-02       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  If cumulative risk assessment is the answer, what is the question?

Authors:  Michael A Callahan; Ken Sexton
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  The Mistaken Birth and Adoption of LNT: An Abridged Version.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 2.658

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.