Comparison of cancer risk estimates based on a variety of risk assessment methodologies

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 45-53

  Gold, Lois Swirsky ^a,b   Gaylor, David W ^c   Slone, Thomas H ^b  

^a LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Sciences International Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARCINOGEN; CHLOROFORM;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; BIOASSAY; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER RISK; DATA BASE; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; HUMAN; MODEL; NONHUMAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

RODENTIA;

EID: 0037298765     PISSN: 02732300     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0273-2300(02)00026-0     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Ames B.N., Gold L.S. Paracelsus to parascience: the environmental cancer distraction. Mutat. Res. 447:2000;3-13.
2. Barnes D.G., Dourson M. Reference dose (RfD): description and use in health risk assessments. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 8:1988;471-486.
3. Bernstein L., Gold L.S., Ames B.N., Pike M.C., Hoel D.G. Some tautologous aspects of the comparison of carcinogenic potency in rats and mice. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 5:1985;79-86.
4. Gaylor D.W. Relationship between the shape of dose-response curves and background tumor rates. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 16:1992;2-9.
5. Gaylor D.W., Chen J.J., Sheehan D.M. Uncertainty in cancer risk estimates. Risk Anal. 13:1993;149-154.
6. Gaylor D.W., Gold L.S. Quick estimate of the regulatory virtually safe dose based on the maximum tolerated dose for rodent bioassays. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 22:1995;57-63. doi:10.1006/rtph.1995.1069.
7. Gaylor D.W., Gold L.S. Regulatory cancer risk assessment based an a quick estimate of a benchmark dose derived from the maximum tolerated dose. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 28:1998;222-225. doi:10.1006/rtph.1998.1258.
8. Gold L.S., Manley N.B., Slone T.H., Rohrbach L. Supplement to the carcinogenic potency database (CPDB): results of animal bioassays published in the general literature in 1993 to 1994 and by the National Toxicology Program in 1995 to 1996. Environ. Health Perspect. 107(Suppl. 4):1999;527-600. http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1999/suppl-4/toc.html.
9. Gold L.S., Slone T.H., Ames B.N. What do animal cancer tests tell us about human cancer risk? Overview of analyses of the carcinogenic potency database. Drug Metab. Rev. 30:1998;359-404. http://potency.berkeley.edu/text/drugmetrev.html.
10. Gold L.S., Slone T.H., Ames B.N., Manley N.B., Garfinkel G.B., Rohrbach L. Carcinogenic potency database. Gold L.S., Zeiger E. Handbook of Carcinogenic Potency and Genotoxicity Databases. 1997;1-605 CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
11. Gold L.S., Zeiger E. Handbook of Carcinogenic Potency and Genotoxicity Databases. 1997;CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
12. Heywood R., Sortwell R.J., Noel P.R.B., Street A.E., Prentice D.E., Roe F.J.C., Wadsworth P.F., Worden A.N. Safety evaluation of toothpaste containing chloroform. III. Long-term study in beagle dogs. J. Environ. Pathol. Toxicol. 2:1979;835-851.
13. Jarabek A.M. Inhalation RfC methodology: dosimetric adjustments and dose-response estimation of noncancer toxicity in the upper respiratory tract. Inhal. Toxicol. 6(Suppl.):1994;301-325.
14. Jarabek A.M. The application of dosimetry models to identify key processes and parameters for default dose response assessment approaches. Toxicol. Lett. 79:1995;171-184.
15. Jorgenson T.A., Meierhenry E.F., Rushbrook C.J., Bull R.J., Robinson M. Carcinogenicity of chloroform in drinking water to male Osborne-Mendel rats and female B6C3F1 mice. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 5:1985;760-769.
16. Renwick A.G. The use of an additional safety or uncertainty factor for nature of toxicity in the estimation of acceptable daily intake and tolerable daily intake values. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 22:1995;250-261. doi:10.1006/rtph.1995.0007.
17. Schwartz C.S. A semiquantitative method for selection of safety factors in establishing OELs for pharmaceutical compounds. Human Ecol. Risk Assessment. 1:1995;527-543.
18. U.S. Congress Committee on Agriculture, 1996. Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991. General Quantitative Risk Assessment Guidelines for Noncancer Health Effects. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH.
20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. Methods for Derivation of Inhalation Reference Concentrations and Application of Inhalation Dosimetry. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, USEPA, Washington, DC.
21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996. Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Fed. Reg. 61, 17960-18011.
22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999. Draft Revised Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. USEPA, Washington, DC.
23. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001. Toxicological Review of Chloroform (CAS No. 67-66-3) in Support of Summary Information on the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). USEPA, Washington, DC.
24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH.