Comparison of available benchmark dose softwares and models using trichloroethylene as a model substance

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 343-355

  Falk Filipsson, Agneta ^a   Victorin, Katarina ^a  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Benchmark dose; Continuous data; Dichotomous data; Dose effect; Dose response; Health risk assessment; Mathematical models; Software; Trichloroethylene

Indexed keywords

TRICHLOROETHYLENE;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER MODEL; COMPUTER PROGRAM; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL;

EID: 0038731128     PISSN: 02732300     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0273-2300(03)00008-4     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. Petrov B.N., Csaki F. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Theory. 1973;Akademia Kiado, Budapest.
2. Allen B.C., Kavlock R.J., Kimmel C.A., Faustman E.M. Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. II. Comparison of generic benchmark dose estimates with no observed adverse effect levels. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 23:1994;487-495.
3. Appel, M.J., Bouman, H.G.M., Pieters, M.N., Slob, W., 2001. Evaluation of the applicability of the benchmark approach to existing toxicological data. National institute of public health and the environment Bilthoven, The Netherlands. Report no. 601930 001, July, 2001.
4. Bell, Z.G., Olson, K.J., Benya I.J., 1982. Final Report of Audit Findings of the manufacturing Chemists Association (MCA): Administrated Trichloroethylene (TCE) Chronic Inhalation Study of Industrial Biotest Laboratories (1978) From Norweigan Pollution and Control Authority. Kriteriedokument for trikloreten, No. 5, Oslo, 1982.
5. Buben J.A., O'Flaherty E.J. Delineation of the role of metabolism in the hepatotoxicity of trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene: a dose-effect study. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 78:1985;105-122.
6. Crump K. A new method for determining allowable daily intakes. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 4:1984;854-871.
7. Crump K.S. Calculation of benchmark doses from continuous data. Risk Anal. 15:1995;79-89.
8. Elcombe C.R. Species differences in carcinogenicity and peroxicome proliferation due to trichloroethylene: a biochemical human hazard assessment. Arch. Toxicol. Suppl. 8:1985;6-17.
9. Elcombe C.R., Rose M.S., Pratt I.S. Biochemical, histological, and ultrastructural changes in rat and mouse liver following the administration of trichloroethylene: possible relevance to species differences in hepatocarcinogenicity. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 79:1985;365-376.
10. Faustman E.M., 1996. Review of Noncancer Risk Assessment: Application of the Benchmark Dose Methods. Prepared for the Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management. http://www.riskworld.com/Nreports/1996/risk_rpt/pdf/faustman.pdf.
11. Fransson, R., Ahlborg, U., 1990. Risk assessment of dichloromethane, trichloroethene, and tetrachloroethene in ambient air (in Swedish, summary in English). In: Report from the Institute of Environmental Medicine, No. 5/90, Stockholm, Sweden.
12. Fukuda K., Takemoto K., Tsuruta H. Inhalation carcinogenicity of trichloroethylene in mice and rats. Ind. Health. 21:1983;243-254.
13. Haag-Grönlund M., Fransson-Steen R., Victorin K. Application of the benchmark method to risk assessment of trichloroethylene. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 21:1995;261-269.
14. Henschler D., Romen W., Elsässer H.M., Reichert D., Eder E., Radwan Z. Carcinogenicity study of trichlororethylene by long-term inhalation in three animal species. Arch. Toxicol. 43:1980;237-248.
15. Howe, 1990. THRESH and THC: software developed by K.S. Crump Division of Clement International Corp., Ruston, LA.
16. Kalliomaa K., Haag-Grönlund M., Victorin K. A new model function for continuous data sets in health risk assessment of chemicals using the benchmark dose concept. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 27:1998;98-107.
17. Kavlock R.J., Schmid J.E., Setzer R.W. A simulation study of the influence of study design on the estimation of benchmark doses for developmental toxicity. Risk Anal. 3:1996;399-410.
18. Kimmel C., Gaylor D. Issues in qualitative and quantitative risk analysis for developmental toxicology. Risk Anal. 8:1988;15-21.
19. Kjellstrand P., Holmquist B., Alm P., Kanje M., Romare S., Jonsson I., Månsson L., Bjerkmo M. Trichloroethylene: further studies of the effects on body and organ weights and plasma buturylcholinesterase activity in mice. Acta Pharm. Toxicol. 53:1983;375-384.
20. Maltoni C., Lefemine G., Cotti G., Perino G. Long-term carcinogenicity bioassay on trichloroethylene administered by inhalation to Sprague Dawley rats and Swiss and B6C3F1 mice. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 534:1988;316-342.
21. Melnick R.L., Jameson C.W., Goehl T.J., Maronpot R.R., Collins B.J., Greenwell A., Harrington F.W., Wilson R.E., Tomazewski K.E., Agarwal D.K. Application of microencapsulation for toxicology studies. II. Toxicity for microencapsulated trichloroethylene in Fischer rats. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 8:1987;432-442.
22. Merrick B.A., Robinson M., Condie L.W. Differing hepatotoxicity and lethality after subacute trichloroethylene exposure in aqueous or corn oil gavage vehicles in B6C3F1 mice. J. Appl. Toxicol. 9(1):1989;15-21.
23. NCI, 1976. Carcinogenesis bioassay of trichloroethylene. CAS NO79-01-6, National Cancer Institute, Betsheda, MD. DHEW publication No. NIH 76-802.
24. NTP, 1983. Carcinogenesis studies of trichloroethylene (without epichlorohydrin) (CAS NO79-01-6) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (gavage studies) NTP TR 243. NIH (National Institute of Health) Publication No. 83-1799.
25. NTP, 1988. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of trichloroethylene (CAS NO79-01-6) in four strains of rats (ACI, August, Marshall, Osborne-Mendel) (gavage studies). NTP TR 273. NIH (National Institute of Health) Publication No. 88-2529.
26. OECD, 1998. OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals - 10th addendum, Section 4 Human Health Effects. Paris, October 1998.
27. Sand S., Falk Filipsson A., Victorin K. Evaluation of the benchmark dose method for dichotomous data: model dependence and model selection. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 36:2002;184-197.
28. Slob, W., Pieters, M.N., 1997. Few large, or many small dose groups? An evaluation of toxicological study designs using computer simulations. National institute of public health and the environment Bilthoven, The Netherlands. Report No. 620 110 006.
29. Stott W.T., Quast J.F., Watanabe P.G. The pharmacokinetics and macro molecular interactions of trichloroethylene in mice and rats. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 62:1982;137-151.
30. U.S. EPA., 1995. The use of the Benchmark dose method in health risk assessment. Washington, DC USEPA. EPA/630/R-94/007, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
31. U.S. EPA Benchmark dose software (BMDS). http://www.epa.gov/ncea/bmds.htm.