A Parametric Model for Detecting Hormetic Effects in Developmental Toxicity Studies

Risk Analysis

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 65-72

  Hunt, Daniel L ^a   Bowman, Dale ^b  

^a ST JUDE CHILDREN S RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI   (United States)

Author keywords

Beta binomial; Dose response; Hormesis; Threshold; U shape

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; FUNCTIONS; SET THEORY; TOXICITY;

DOSE-RESPONSE PATTERNS; HORMETIC EFFECTS;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

TOXICITY;

BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY; DOSE RESPONSE; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; HORMESIS; LOW DRUG DOSE; MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONCENTRATION; PARAMETRIC TEST; REVIEW; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; TOXICITY;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; EMBRYONIC AND FETAL DEVELOPMENT; FEMALE; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PREGNANCY; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 1442281320     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00412.x     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Williams, D. A. (1975). The analysis of binary responses from toxicological experiments involving reproduction and teratogenicity. Biometrics, 31, 949-952.
2. Haseman, J. K., & Kupper, L. L. (1979). Analysis of dichotomous response data from certain toxicological experiments. Biometrics, 35, 281-293.
3. Ryan, L. (1992). Quantitative risk assessment for developmental toxicity. Biometrics, 48, 163-174.
4. Hatch, T. F. (1971). Thresholds: Do they exist? Archives of Environmental Health, 22, 687-689.
5. Wilson, J. G. (1973). Environment and Birth Defects. New York: Academic Press.
6. Cox, C. (1987). Threshold dose-response models in toxicology. Biometrics, 43, 511-523.
7. Schwartz, P. F., Gennings, C., & Chinchilli, V. M. (1995). Threshold models for combination data from reproductive and developmental experiments. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 862-870.
8. Calabrese, E. J., McCarthy, M. E., & Kenyon, E. (1987). The occurrence of chemically induced hormesis. Health Physics, 52, 531-541.
9. Rodricks, J. V., Frankos, V., Turnbull, D., & Tardiff, R. G. (1987). Risk assessment for effects other than cancer. In C. W. Felix (Ed.), Food Protection Technology. Chelsea, MI: Lewis Publishers.
10. Calabrese, E. J., Baldwin, L. A., & Holland, C. D. (1999). Hormesis: A highly generalizable and reproducible phenomenon with important implications for risk assessment. Risk Analysis, 19, 261-281.
11. Calabrese, E. J., & Baldwin, L. A. (2001). Hormesis: U-shaped dose responses and their centrality in toxicology. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 22, 285-291.
12. Calabrese, E. J. (2002). Hormesis: Changing view of the dose-response, a personal account of the history and current status. Mutation Research, 511, 181-189.
13. Haseman, J. K. (1983). Patterns of tumor incidence in two-year bioassay feeding studies in Fischer 344 rats. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 3, 1-9.
14. Davis, J. M., & Svendsgaard, D. J. (1994). Nonmonotonic dose-response relationships in toxicological studies. In E. J. Calabrese (Ed.), Biological Effects of Low Level Exposures: Dose-Response Relationships. Ann Arbor, MI: Lewis Publishers.
15. Sielken, R. L., & Stevenson, D. E. (1998). Some implications for quantitative risk assessment if hormesis exists. Human and Experimental Toxicology, 17, 259-262.
16. U.S. EPA. (1996). Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Federal Register, 61, 17960-18011.
17. Gaylor, D. W. (1994). Biostatistical approaches to low level exposures. In E. J. Calabrese (Ed.), Biological Effects of Low Level Exposures: Dose-Response Relationships. Ann Arbor, MI: Lewis Publishers.
18. Chen, J. J., & Kodell, R. L. (1989). Quantitative risk assessment for teratological effects. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84, 966-971.
19. Ryan, L. M. (2000). Statistical issues in toxicology. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95, 304-308.
20. Paul, S. R. (1982). Analysis of proportions of affected foetuses in teratological experiments. Biometrics, 38, 361-370.
21. Kupper, L. L., Portier, C., Hogan, M. D., & Yamamoto, E. (1986). The impact of litter effects on dose-response modeling in teratology. Biometrics, 42, 85-98.
22. Tyl, R. W., Jones-Price, C., Marr, M. C., & Kimmel, C. A. (1983). Teratologic evaluation of diethylhexyl phthalate (CAS No. 117-81-7) in CD-1 Mice. Final Study Report for NCTR/NTP contract No. 222-80-2031 (C), NTIS no. PB85105674. Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service.
23. Doull, J., Cattley, R., Elcombe, C., Lake, B. G., Swenberg, J., Wilkinson, C., Williams, G., & Gemert, M. (1999). A cancer risk assessment of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate: Application of the new US EPA risk assessment guidelines. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 29, 327-357.
24. Narotsky, M. G. (1995). Nonadditive developmental toxicity in mixtures of trichloroethylene, di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and heptachlor in a 5x5x5 design. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 27, 203-216.
25. Downs, T. (1992). Biostatistical approaches for modeling u-shaped dose-response curves and study design considerations in assessing the biological effects of low doses. In E. J. Calabrese (Ed.), Biological Effects of Low Level Exposures to Chemicals and Radiation. Ann Arbor, MI: Lewis Publishers.
26. IMSL. (1991). Math-Stat/Library, Version 2.0. Houston, TX: IMSL Inc.
27. Teeguarden, J. G., Dragan, Y., & Pitot, H. C. (2000). Hazard assessment of chemical carcinogens: the impact of hormesis. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 20, 113-120.
28. Hunt, D. (2002). Simulations to improve experimental designs for u-shaped dose-response modeling. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 72, 737-746.