Peer consultation on relationship between PAC profile and toxicity of petroleum substances

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Volumn 67, Issue 2, 2013, Pages

  Patterson, Jacqueline ^a   Maier, Andrew ^a   Kohrman Vincent, Melissa ^a   Dourson, Michael L ^a  

^a Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment   (United States)

Author keywords

ARC; HBPS; PAC (polycyclic aromatic compound); Peer consultation; Peer review; Petroleum HPV chemical challenge; QCAR; Quantitative composition activity relationship

Indexed keywords

PETROLEUM DERIVATIVE; POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC COMPOUND;

ARTICLE; BIOSTATISTICS; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HIGH PRODUCTION VOLUME PROGRAM; HUMAN; PANEL STUDY; PEER COUNSELING; PEER REVIEW; PRENATAL DRUG EXPOSURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAMPLING; SCIENTIST; SKIN IRRITATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; VALIDATION PROCESS;

HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS;

ARC; HBPS; PAC (POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC COMPOUND); PEER CONSULTATION; PEER REVIEW; PETROLEUM HPV CHEMICAL CHALLENGE; QCAR; QUANTITATIVE COMPOSITION ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

ANIMALS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PEER REVIEW; PETROLEUM; POLYCYCLIC HYDROCARBONS, AROMATIC;

EID: 84886753257     PISSN: 02732300     EISSN: 10960295     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.11.005     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Gray, T.M., Simpson B.J., Nicolich, M.J., Murray, F.J., Verstuyft, A.W., Roth, R.N., McKee, R., 2013. Assessing the mammalian toxicity of high-boiling petroleum substances under the rubric of the HPV program. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 67 (2S), S1-S3.
2. Lord C.G., Ross L., Lepper M.R. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1979, 37(11):2098-2109.
3. McKee, R., Schreiner, C., Nicolich, M.J., Gray, T.M., 2013. Genetic toxicity of high-boiling petroleum substances. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 67 (2S), S75-S85.
4. Meek M.E., Patterson J., Strawson J., Liteplo R. Engaging expert peers in the development of risk assessments. Risk Anal. 2007, 27(6):1609-1621.
5. Murray, F.J., Roth, R.N., Nicolich, M.J., Gray, T.M., Simpson, B.J., 2013. The relationship between developmental toxicity and aromatic-ring class profile of high-boiling petroleum substances. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 67 (2S), S46-S59.
6. NAS (National Academy of Sciences), 2003. Policy and Procedures on Committee Composition and Balance and Conflicts of Interest for Committees used in the Development of Reports, May. Available at: <> (accessed 05.03.12). http://www.nationalacademies.org/coi/index.html.
7. Nicolich, M.J., Simpson, B.J., Murray, F.J., Roth, R.N., Gray, T.M., 2013. The development of statistical models to determine the relationship between aromatic-ring class profile and repeat-dose and developmental toxicities of high-boiling petroleum substances. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 67 (2S), S10-S29.
8. OMB (Office of Management and Budget), 2004. Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, December. Available at: <> (accessed 05.03.12). http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-03.pdf.
9. PAC Analysis Task Group, 2008. The Relationship Between the Aromatic Ring Class Content and Selected Endpoints of Repeat-Dose and Developmental Toxicity of High-Boiling Petroleum Substances, March 31. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC. Available at: <> (accessed 05.03.12). http://www.petroleumhpv.org/pages/publications.html.
10. Roth, R., Simpson, B.J., Nicolich, M.J., Murray, F.J., Gray, T.M., 2013. The relationship between repeat-dose toxicity and aromatic-ring class profile of high-boiling petroleum substances. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
11. Simpson, B., Nicolich, M.J., Roth, R.N., Murray, F.J., Gray, T.M., this issue. Application of statistical models to characterize the repeat-dose and developmental toxicity of high-boiling petroleum substances. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
12. TERA (Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment), 2008. Report of the Peer Consultation on Relationship Between PAC Profile and Toxicity of Petroleum Substances. Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment, Cincinnati, OH. Available at: <> (accessed 05.03.12). http://www.tera.org/peer/API/APIWelcome.htm.
13. TERA (Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment), 2012. How TERA Organizes and Conducts Independent Peer Review and Consultation Meetings. Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment, Cincinnati, OH. Available at: <> (accessed 05.03.12). http://www.tera.org/peer/PeerProcess.html.
14. US EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency), 2006. Peer Review Handbook, third ed. EPA/100/B-06/002. Science Policy Council, Washington, DC. Available at: <> (accessed 05.03.12). http://www.epa.gov/peerreview/pdfs/Peer%20Review%20HandbookMay06.pdf.
15. Wilson T.D., DePaulo B.M., Mook D.G., Klaaren K.J. Scientists' evaluations of research: the biasing effects of the importance of the topic. Psychol. Sci. 1993, 4:322-325.