...
首页> 外文期刊>Toxicology mechanisms and methods >The 2-year rodent bioassay in drug and chemical carcinogenesis testing: Sensitivity, according to the framework of carcinogenic action
【24h】

The 2-year rodent bioassay in drug and chemical carcinogenesis testing: Sensitivity, according to the framework of carcinogenic action

机译:药物和化学致癌检测中的2年啮齿动物生物测定:敏感性,根据致癌作用的框架

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The long-term rodent bioassay (RCB) has been the gold-standard for the pre-marketing prediction of chemical and drug carcinogenicity to humans. Nonetheless, the validity of this toxicity test has remained elusive for several decades. In the quest to uncover the performance of the RCB, itssensitivity(SEN) was charted as the first step. This appraisal was based on (a) chemicals with sufficient epidemiological evidence of carcinogenicity, and (b) other substances with limited epidemiological evidence, or remarkable classifications of carcinogenicity based on mechanistic or pharmacological data. In the present study, chemicals evaluated for their carcinogenicity to humans in IARC Monographs volumes 1-123, U.S. EPA IRIS Assessments, and U.S. NTP RoC were considered. This investigation gathered additional evidence supporting that, in hazard identification, the RCB is unwarranted for mutagenic or direct-acting genotoxicants. However, for purposes of risk assessment or management, the RCB might be justified whenever there is a lack of reliable and/or comprehensive epidemiological data. The RCB exhibited a significantly different SEN for threshold-based human carcinogens compared to non-threshold-based ones. With threshold-based chemicals, to increase the SEN of the testing from 80% (rat-RCB) to 90%, the 2-species RCB might be warranted. Nevertheless, the resolve would depend on the viewpoint, and on the future analysis of the overall performance of the RCB. In terms of SEN, and cancer hazard identification, the comparison between the RCB and alternative methods (e.g. rasH2 mouse, Tg.AC mouse) is now enabled.
机译:长期啮齿动物生物测定(RCB)已成为上市前预测化学和药物对人类致癌性的金标准。尽管如此,这种毒性试验的有效性几十年来一直难以捉摸。在探索RCB性能的过程中,其灵敏度(SEN)被绘制为第一步。该评估基于(a)具有足够致癌性流行病学证据的化学品,以及(b)具有有限流行病学证据的其他物质,或基于机械或药理学数据的显著致癌性分类。在本研究中,考虑了IARC专著第1-123卷、美国EPA IRIS评估和美国NTP RoC中评估其对人类致癌性的化学品。这项调查收集了额外的证据,证明在危险识别中,RCB不适用于致突变或直接作用的基因毒物。然而,出于风险评估或管理的目的,每当缺乏可靠和/或全面的流行病学数据时,RCB可能是合理的。RCB对基于阈值的人类致癌物与非基于阈值的人类致癌物表现出显著不同的SEN。使用基于阈值的化学品,为了将试验的SEN从80%(大鼠RCB)增加到90%,可能需要使用两种RCB。然而,解决方案将取决于观点,以及对RCB整体绩效的未来分析。在SEN和癌症危险识别方面,RCB和替代方法(例如rasH2小鼠、Tg.AC小鼠)之间的比较现已启用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号