IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v21y2001i1p91-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Characterizing Dose‐Response Relationships in Multiple Cancer Bioassays

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan L. French
  • Paige L. Williams

Abstract

In the evaluation of chemical compounds for carcinogenic risk, regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Toxicology Program (NTP) have traditionally fit a dose‐response model to data from rodent bioassays, and then used the fitted model to estimate a Virtually Safe Dose or the dose corresponding to a very small increase (usually 10−6) in risk over background. Much recent interest has been directed at incorporating additional scientific information regarding the properties of the specific chemical under investigation into the risk assessment process, including biological mechanisms of cancer induction, metabolic pathways, and chemical structure and activity. Despite the fact that regulatory agencies are currently poised to allow use of nonlinear dose‐response models based on the concept of an underlying threshold for nongenotoxic chemicals, there have been few attempts to investigate the overall relationship between the shape of dose‐response curves and mutagenicity. Using data from an historical database of NTP cancer bioassays, the authors conducted a repeated‐measures analysis of the estimated shape from fitting extended Weibull dose‐response curves. It was concluded that genotoxic chemicals have dose‐response curves that are closer to linear than those for nongenotoxic chemicals, though on average, both types of compounds have dose‐response curves that are convex and the effect of genotoxicity is small.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan L. French & Paige L. Williams, 2001. "Characterizing Dose‐Response Relationships in Multiple Cancer Bioassays," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 91-102, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:21:y:2001:i:1:p:91-102
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.211092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.211092
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.211092?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
    ---><---

    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:21:y:2001:i:1:p:91-102. 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.