IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v12y1992i1p73-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Monte Carlo Simulation of Rodent Carcinogenicity Bioassays

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Shlyakhter
  • Gay Goodman
  • Richard Wilson

Abstract

In this paper we describe a simulation, by Monte Carlo methods, of the results of rodent carcinogenicity bioassays. Our aim is to study how the observed correlation between carcinogenic potency (β or ln2/TD50) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) arises, and whether the existence of this correlation leads to an artificial correlation between carcinogenic potencies in rats and mice. The validity of the bioassay results depends upon, among other things, certain biases in the experimental design of the bioassays. These include selection of chemicals for bioassay and details of the experimental protocol, including dose levels. We use as variables in our simulation the following factors: (1) dose group size, (2) number of dose groups, (3) tumor rate in the control (zero‐dose) group, (4) distribution of the MTD values of the group of chemicals as specified by the mean and standard deviation, (5) the degree of correlation between β and the MTD, as given by the standard deviation of the random error term in the linear regression of log β on log (1/MTD), and (6) an upper limit on the number of animals with tumors. Monte Carlo simulation can show whether the information present in the existing rodent bioassay database is sufficient to reject the validity of the proposed interspecies correlations at a given level of stringency. We hope that such analysis will be useful for future bioassay design, and more importantly, for discussion of the whole NCI/ NTP program.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Shlyakhter & Gay Goodman & Richard Wilson, 1992. "Monte Carlo Simulation of Rodent Carcinogenicity Bioassays," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 73-82, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:12:y:1992:i:1:p:73-82
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01309.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01309.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01309.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. D. Krewski & D .W. Gaylor & A. P. Soms & M. Szyszkowicz, 1993. "An Overview of the Report: Correlation Between Carcinogenic Potency and the Maximum Tolerated Dose: Implications for Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 383-398, August.
    2. Gay Goodrnan & Richard Wilson, 1992. "Comparison of the Dependence of the TD50 on Maximum Tolerated Dose for Mutagens and Nonmutagens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 525-533, December.
    3. Wout Slob, 1994. "Uncertainty Analysis in Multiplicative Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 571-576, August.
    4. David A. Freedman & Lois Swirsky Gold & Thomas H. Slone, 1993. "How Tautological Are Interspecies Correlations of Carcinogenic Potencies?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 265-272, June.
    5. Alison C. Taylor & John S. Evans & Thomas E. McKone, 1993. "The Value of Animal Test Information in Environmental Control Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 403-412, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:12:y:1992:i:1:p:73-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.