rodent cancer bioassay

啮齿动物癌症生物测定法
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    进行啮齿动物癌症生物测定以进行农用化学品安全性评估,但它们通常不通知监管决策。作为合作努力的一部分,重新思考农药项目致癌性评估(ReCAAP)开发了一个报告框架,以指导基于证据权重(WOE)的致癌性评估,该评估展示了如何满足慢性风险评估的监管要求,而无需进行终生啮齿动物生物测定。该框架是多方利益相关者合作的结果,通过编写案例研究的迭代过程(以弃权的形式),豁免的技术同行评审,并将关键学习纳入框架,以在随后的案例研究开发中进行测试。用于制定框架的豁免示例是针对已注册的农业化学活性物质进行回顾性撰写的,可以通过美国EPA的风险评估文件或数据评估记录获得必要的数据和信息。这项工作对框架的发展至关重要,但它缺乏真实性,因为审查豁免的利益相关者已经知道啮齿动物癌症生物测定的结果。先正达通过对尚未提交数据包进行注册的新活性物质的三个前瞻性案例研究的豁免,扩大了对ReCAAP报告框架的评估。预期豁免遵循考虑ADME的既定框架,潜在暴露,亚慢性毒性,遗传毒性,免疫抑制,激素扰动,行动模式(MOA),以及使用WOE评估可读取的所有相关信息。出发点是根据现有数据估计的,不包括癌症生物测定结果,建议用于慢性饮食风险评估。阅读评估比较了可靠的注册化学类似物的数据,以加强对慢性毒性和/或致瘤潜力的预测。前瞻性案例研究代表了一系列情景,从具有已知MOA的已建立的化学类别中的新分子到具有新的杀虫MOA(pMOA)的分子,并且对相关分子的读取有限。这一努力代表了在没有啮齿动物癌症生物测定的情况下建立基于WOE的致癌性评估标准的重要步骤,同时确保健康保护性慢性饮食风险评估。
    The rodent cancer bioassays are conducted for agrochemical safety assessment yet they often do not inform regulatory decision-making. As part of a collaborative effort, the Rethinking Carcinogenicity Assessment for Agrochemicals Project (ReCAAP) developed a reporting framework to guide a weight of evidence (WOE)-based carcinogenicity assessment that demonstrates how to fulfill the regulatory requirements for chronic risk estimation without the need to conduct lifetime rodent bioassays. The framework is the result of a multi-stakeholder collaboration that worked through an iterative process of writing case studies (in the form of waivers), technical peer reviews of waivers, and an incorporation of key learnings back into the framework to be tested in subsequent case study development. The example waivers used to develop the framework were written retrospectively for registered agrochemical active substances for which the necessary data and information could be obtained through risk assessment documents or data evaluation records from the US EPA. This exercise was critical to the development of a framework, but it lacked authenticity in that the stakeholders reviewing the waiver already knew the outcome of the rodent cancer bioassay(s). Syngenta expanded the evaluation of the ReCAAP reporting framework by writing waivers for three prospective case studies for new active substances where the data packages had not yet been submitted for registration. The prospective waivers followed the established framework considering ADME, potential exposure, subchronic toxicity, genotoxicity, immunosuppression, hormone perturbation, mode of action (MOA), and all relevant information available for read-across using a WOE assessment. The point of departure was estimated from the available data, excluding the cancer bioassay results, with a proposed use for the chronic dietary risk assessment. The read-across assessments compared data from reliable registered chemical analogues to strengthen the prediction of chronic toxicity and/or tumorigenic potential. The prospective case studies represent a range of scenarios, from a new molecule in a well-established chemical class with a known MOA to a molecule with a new pesticidal MOA (pMOA) and limited read-across to related molecules. This effort represents an important step in establishing criteria for a WOE-based carcinogenicity assessment without the rodent cancer bioassay(s) while ensuring a health protective chronic dietary risk assessment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    The history of the development of the cell transformation assays (CTAs) is described, providing an overview of in vitro cell transformation from its origin to the new transcriptomic-based CTAs. Application of this knowledge is utilized to address how the different types of CTAs, variously addressing initiation and promotion, can be included on a mechanistic basis within the integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) for non-genotoxic carcinogens. Building upon assay assessments targeting the key events in the IATA, we identify how the different CTA models can appropriately fit, following preceding steps in the IATA. The preceding steps are the prescreening transcriptomic approaches, and assessment within the earlier key events of inflammation, immune disruption, mitotic signaling and cell injury. The CTA models address the later key events of (sustained) proliferation and change in morphology leading to tumor formation. The complementary key biomarkers with respect to the precursor key events and respective CTAs are mapped, providing a structured mechanistic approach to represent the complexity of the (non-genotoxic) carcinogenesis process, and specifically their capacity to identify non-genotoxic carcinogenic chemicals in a human relevant IATA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    The research field of \"Toxicologic Pathology\" evaluates potentially toxic chemical exposures and chemically mediated illnesses in humans and experimental animals. Comparative studies of chemical exposures between model organisms and humans are essential for the risk assessment of chemicals and human health. Here we review the development and activities of the Japanese Society of Toxicologic Pathology (JSTP) during its 37-year history. Toxicological pathology studies provide many interesting and valuable findings. Rodent cancer bioassay data demonstrate the importance of dose levels, times, and duration of exposures to chemicals that possibly cause human cancers. Studies of toxic injuries in the nasal cavity demonstrate that specific chemical compounds affect different target cells and tissues. These observations are relevant for current air pollution studies in the preventive medicine field. Future toxicological pathology studies will be enhanced by applying molecular pathology with advanced observation techniques. In addition to the nasal cavity, another sense organ such as the tongue should be a potential next program of our mission for risk assessment of inhaled and ingested chemicals. As a message to the younger members of the JSTP, interdisciplinary and global cooperation should be emphasized. Elucidating the mechanisms of toxicologic pathology with a combination of advanced expertise in genetics and molecular biology offers promise for future advances by JSTP members.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Chemical substances are subjected to assessment of genotoxic and carcinogenic effects before being marketed to protect man and the environment from health risks. For agrochemicals, the long-term rodent carcinogenicity study is currently required from a regulatory perspective. Although it is the current mainstay for the detection of nongenotoxic carcinogens, carcinogenicity studies are shown to have prominent weaknesses and are subject to ethical and scientific debate. A transition toward a mechanism-based weight-of-evidence approach is considered a requirement to enhance the prediction of carcinogenic potential for environmental (agro)chemicals. The resulting approach should make optimal use of innovative (computational) tools and be less animal demanding. To identify the various mode of actions (MOAs) underlying the nongenotoxic carcinogenic potential of agrochemicals, we conducted an extensive analysis of 411 unique agrochemicals that have been evaluated for carcinogenicity by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). About one-third of these substances could be categorized as nongenotoxic carcinogens with an average of approximately two tumor types per substance, observed in a variety of organs. For two-third of the tumor cases, an underlying MOA (network) could be identified. This analysis demonstrates that a limited set of MOA (networks) is underlying nongenotoxic carcinogenicity of agrochemicals, illustrating that the transition toward a MOA-driven approach appears manageable. Ultimately the approach should cover relevant MOAs and its associated key events; this will also facilitate the evaluation of the human relevance. This manuscript describes the results of the analysis while identifying knowledge gaps and necessities to achieve a mechanism-based weight-of-evidence approach.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    关于根据动物致癌性数据评估环境因素对人类癌症风险的评估,经常表达矛盾的观点;这主要是因为与从实验动物到人类环境的研究中的毒理学发现推断相关的不确定性。这些不确定性的基础是与实验如何设计有关的问题,如何严格地测试假设,以及断言在多大程度上超出了实际发现。国家和国际卫生机构将良好的实验动物研究中的致癌性发现视为对人类潜在致癌风险的证据。当特定试剂的阳性和阴性致癌性数据都存在时,或者当不完整的机理数据表明反应可能存在物种差异时,就会产生争议。本文讨论了可能导致不同结果的实验设计和评估问题。作为评估环境因素致癌潜力的可靠数据来源,实验研究必须包括:a)对研究终点敏感的动物模型;b)对药物和给药剂量的详细表征;c)具有挑战性的剂量和暴露持续时间(大鼠和小鼠至少2年);d)每个剂量组足够数量的动物能够检测到真正的效果;e)多个剂量组,以表征剂量-反应关系,f)完成和同行评审的组织病理学评价;和g)基于生存调整的肿瘤发生率的成对比较和趋势分析。药代动力学模型和机理假设可以提供对药物生物学行为的见解;然而,在用于评估人类癌症风险之前,必须对它们进行充分的测试。
    Conflicting views have been expressed frequently on assessments of human cancer risk of environmental agents based on animal carcinogenicity data; this is primarily because of uncertainties associated with extrapolations of toxicologic findings from studies in experimental animals to human circumstances. Underlying these uncertainties are issues related to how experiments are designed, how rigorously hypotheses are tested, and to what extent assertions extend beyond actual findings. National and international health agencies regard carcinogenicity findings in well-conducted experimental animal studies as evidence of potential carcinogenic risk to humans. Controversies arise when both positive and negative carcinogenicity data exist for a specific agent or when incomplete mechanistic data suggest a possible species difference in response. Issues of experimental design and evaluation that might contribute to disparate results are addressed in this article. To serve as reliable sources of data for the evaluation of the carcinogenic potential of environmental agents, experimental studies must include a) animal models that are sensitive to the end points under investigation; b) detailed characterization of the agent and the administered doses; c) challenging doses and durations of exposure (at least 2 years for rats and mice); d) sufficient numbers of animals per dose group to be capable of detecting a true effect; e) multiple dose groups to allow characterization of dose-response relationships, f) complete and peer-reviewed histopathologic evaluations; and g) pairwise comparisons and analyses of trends based on survival-adjusted tumor incidence. Pharmacokinetic models and mechanistic hypotheses may provide insights into the biological behavior of the agent; however, they must be adequately tested before being used to evaluate human cancer risk.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号