Literature DB >> 9599693

Alternative tests: carcinogenesis as an example.

B Schwetz1, D Gaylor.   

Abstract

Acceptance of new tests that are alternatives to currently used toxicology tests is a topic of considerable importance in the field of toxicology. Carcinogenicity testing today normally includes 2-year studies in rats and mice of both sexes, following widely accepted procedures for husbandry; selection of dose levels; pathology and toxicity observations; and statistical interpretation of tumor data. These studies are usually preceded by tests for genetic toxicity and subchronic toxicity studies to select dose levels for the 2-year studies. Although these data are used for quantitative risk assessment, the mechanistic basis for effects is usually unknown. The series of studies is very expensive and requires 5 years or more to conduct. Alternative approaches are being developed that would provide more mechanistic information and hopefully would permit decisions to be made about carcinogenic potential without the need to conduct 2-year studies in rats and mice of both sexes. Decisions could be based on a profile of data rather than on the result of one test. Procedures for regulatory acceptance of new approaches for carcinogenicity testing are critical to future progress.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9599693      PMCID: PMC1533376          DOI: 10.1289/ehp.98106467

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


  17 in total

Review 1.  Prediction of the outcome of rodent carcinogenicity bioassays currently being conducted on 44 chemicals by the National Toxicology Program.

Authors:  R W Tennant; J Spalding; S Stasiewicz; J Ashby
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 3.000

2.  Carcinogenicity testing and the evaluation of regulatory requirements for pharmaceuticals.

Authors:  J F Contrera; A C Jacobs; J J DeGeorge
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.271

3.  Prediction of rodent carcinogenicity for 44 chemicals: results.

Authors:  J Ashby; R W Tennant
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 3.000

Review 4.  Will all chemicals be carcinogenic to rodents when adequately evaluated?

Authors:  J Ashby; I F Purchase
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 3.000

5.  Interspecies comparison of carcionogenic potency.

Authors:  E Crouch; R Wilson
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health       Date:  1979-11

6.  The effect of body weight on tumor incidence and carcinogenicity testing in B6C3F1 mice and F344 rats.

Authors:  S K Seilkop
Journal:  Fundam Appl Toxicol       Date:  1995-02

7.  Effects of corn oil, time-related changes, and inter-laboratory variability on tumor occurrence in control Fischer 344 (F344/N) rats.

Authors:  J K Haseman; G N Rao
Journal:  Toxicol Pathol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.902

8.  Uncertainties in interspecies extrapolations of carcinogenicity.

Authors:  E A Crouch
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Predicting chemical carcinogenesis in rodents.

Authors:  J T Wachsman; D W Bristol; J Spalding; M Shelby; R W Tennant
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 10.  Chemicals associated with site-specific neoplasia in 1394 long-term carcinogenesis experiments in laboratory rodents.

Authors:  J Huff; J Cirvello; J Haseman; J Bucher
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 9.031

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Assessing the potential carcinogenic activity of magnetic fields using animal models.

Authors:  J McCann; R Kavet; C N Rafferty
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 9.031

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.