Alternative models for carcinogenicity testing: Weight of evidence evaluations across models

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Twenty-one chemicals were evaluated by standardized protocols in 6 mouse models that have been sugggested as alternatives to the 2-year mouse bioassay. Included were genotoxic and nongenotoxic chemicals, carcinogens and noncarcinogens, immunosuppressive and estrogenic agents, peroxisome proliferators, and chemicals producing cancer in rodents by other mechanisms. Mice were sacrificed at the end of 6 to 12 months, depending on the model. Standardized histopathology, biostatistical analyses, and criteria for overall evaluation of the results were employed. The TgAC transgenic (dermal and oral administration), the Tg-rasH2 transgenic, the heterozygous p53 gene knockout, the homozygous XPA and homozygous XPA-heterozygous p53 gene knockout, and the neonatal mouse models were evaluated. The chemicals were also evaluated in the in vitro SHE assay. Comparison of the results between the various in vivo models suggest that they might have usefulness as screening bioassays for hazard identification for potential human carcinogens. They have the benefits of being quicker, less expensive, and involve fewer animals than the traditional 2-year mouse bioassay. They do not appear to be overly sensitive. However, they do not definitively distinguish between genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens, and they do not have 100% specificity for identifying human carcinogens. Like the 2-year bioassay, the results from these models need to be evaluated in conjunction with other information on a chemical in an overall weight-of-evidence, integrated analytical approach to assess risk for human exposures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)183-190
Number of pages8
JournalToxicologic Pathology
Volume29
Issue numberSUPPL.
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 13 2001

Fingerprint

Biological Assay
Carcinogens
Bioassay
Weights and Measures
Gene Knockout Techniques
p53 Genes
Testing
Cutaneous Administration
Peroxisome Proliferators
Forensic Anthropology
Genes
Immunosuppressive Agents
Knockout Mice
Oral Administration
Rodentia
Estrogens
Assays
Hazards
Screening
Animals

Keywords

  • Chronic mouse bioassay
  • Chronic rat bioassay
  • Genotoxicity
  • Risk assessment
  • Transgenic mouse models

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Molecular Biology
  • Toxicology
  • Cell Biology

Cite this

Alternative models for carcinogenicity testing : Weight of evidence evaluations across models. / Cohen, Samuel Monroe.

In: Toxicologic Pathology, Vol. 29, No. SUPPL., 13.11.2001, p. 183-190.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{72bd737cbc084f26b1e0d8c8658bb976,
title = "Alternative models for carcinogenicity testing: Weight of evidence evaluations across models",
abstract = "Twenty-one chemicals were evaluated by standardized protocols in 6 mouse models that have been sugggested as alternatives to the 2-year mouse bioassay. Included were genotoxic and nongenotoxic chemicals, carcinogens and noncarcinogens, immunosuppressive and estrogenic agents, peroxisome proliferators, and chemicals producing cancer in rodents by other mechanisms. Mice were sacrificed at the end of 6 to 12 months, depending on the model. Standardized histopathology, biostatistical analyses, and criteria for overall evaluation of the results were employed. The TgAC transgenic (dermal and oral administration), the Tg-rasH2 transgenic, the heterozygous p53 gene knockout, the homozygous XPA and homozygous XPA-heterozygous p53 gene knockout, and the neonatal mouse models were evaluated. The chemicals were also evaluated in the in vitro SHE assay. Comparison of the results between the various in vivo models suggest that they might have usefulness as screening bioassays for hazard identification for potential human carcinogens. They have the benefits of being quicker, less expensive, and involve fewer animals than the traditional 2-year mouse bioassay. They do not appear to be overly sensitive. However, they do not definitively distinguish between genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens, and they do not have 100{\%} specificity for identifying human carcinogens. Like the 2-year bioassay, the results from these models need to be evaluated in conjunction with other information on a chemical in an overall weight-of-evidence, integrated analytical approach to assess risk for human exposures.",
keywords = "Chronic mouse bioassay, Chronic rat bioassay, Genotoxicity, Risk assessment, Transgenic mouse models",
author = "Cohen, {Samuel Monroe}",
year = "2001",
month = "11",
day = "13",
doi = "10.1080/019262301753178609",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "183--190",
journal = "Toxicologic Pathology",
issn = "0192-6233",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Alternative models for carcinogenicity testing

T2 - Weight of evidence evaluations across models

AU - Cohen, Samuel Monroe

PY - 2001/11/13

Y1 - 2001/11/13

N2 - Twenty-one chemicals were evaluated by standardized protocols in 6 mouse models that have been sugggested as alternatives to the 2-year mouse bioassay. Included were genotoxic and nongenotoxic chemicals, carcinogens and noncarcinogens, immunosuppressive and estrogenic agents, peroxisome proliferators, and chemicals producing cancer in rodents by other mechanisms. Mice were sacrificed at the end of 6 to 12 months, depending on the model. Standardized histopathology, biostatistical analyses, and criteria for overall evaluation of the results were employed. The TgAC transgenic (dermal and oral administration), the Tg-rasH2 transgenic, the heterozygous p53 gene knockout, the homozygous XPA and homozygous XPA-heterozygous p53 gene knockout, and the neonatal mouse models were evaluated. The chemicals were also evaluated in the in vitro SHE assay. Comparison of the results between the various in vivo models suggest that they might have usefulness as screening bioassays for hazard identification for potential human carcinogens. They have the benefits of being quicker, less expensive, and involve fewer animals than the traditional 2-year mouse bioassay. They do not appear to be overly sensitive. However, they do not definitively distinguish between genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens, and they do not have 100% specificity for identifying human carcinogens. Like the 2-year bioassay, the results from these models need to be evaluated in conjunction with other information on a chemical in an overall weight-of-evidence, integrated analytical approach to assess risk for human exposures.

AB - Twenty-one chemicals were evaluated by standardized protocols in 6 mouse models that have been sugggested as alternatives to the 2-year mouse bioassay. Included were genotoxic and nongenotoxic chemicals, carcinogens and noncarcinogens, immunosuppressive and estrogenic agents, peroxisome proliferators, and chemicals producing cancer in rodents by other mechanisms. Mice were sacrificed at the end of 6 to 12 months, depending on the model. Standardized histopathology, biostatistical analyses, and criteria for overall evaluation of the results were employed. The TgAC transgenic (dermal and oral administration), the Tg-rasH2 transgenic, the heterozygous p53 gene knockout, the homozygous XPA and homozygous XPA-heterozygous p53 gene knockout, and the neonatal mouse models were evaluated. The chemicals were also evaluated in the in vitro SHE assay. Comparison of the results between the various in vivo models suggest that they might have usefulness as screening bioassays for hazard identification for potential human carcinogens. They have the benefits of being quicker, less expensive, and involve fewer animals than the traditional 2-year mouse bioassay. They do not appear to be overly sensitive. However, they do not definitively distinguish between genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens, and they do not have 100% specificity for identifying human carcinogens. Like the 2-year bioassay, the results from these models need to be evaluated in conjunction with other information on a chemical in an overall weight-of-evidence, integrated analytical approach to assess risk for human exposures.

KW - Chronic mouse bioassay

KW - Chronic rat bioassay

KW - Genotoxicity

KW - Risk assessment

KW - Transgenic mouse models

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034750394&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034750394&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/019262301753178609

DO - 10.1080/019262301753178609

M3 - Article

C2 - 11695556

AN - SCOPUS:0034750394

VL - 29

SP - 183

EP - 190

JO - Toxicologic Pathology

JF - Toxicologic Pathology

SN - 0192-6233

IS - SUPPL.

ER -