Cover Image

PAPERBACK
$49.00



View/Hide Left Panel

of the limited range of values q1* can assume once the MTD is established.

This behavior is readily illustrated using model-free upper bounds on low dose risk proposed by Krewski et al. (1991a). The current NTP carcinogenesis screening bioassay generally consists of groups of 50 animals at doses of 0, D/4, D/2 and D = MTD. Using the model-free extrapolation (MFX) procedure with this design, the lowest estimate of potency would occur at the highest possible dose not exhibiting a statistically significant increase in tumor incidence. For carcinogens, there would be a statistically significant increase in the tumor incidence at least at the MTD. Hence, the lowest estimate of potency occurs when there are no tumors at the MTD/2. In this case, the MFX would yield an upper confidence limit on the low dose slope of approximately 0.09/(MTD/2) = 0.18/MTD. The maximum estimate of the low dose slope would occur if the upper confidence limit on the incidence were 1.0 at the lowest dose, i.e., 1.0/(MTD/4) = 4/MTD. Using the MFX procedure, this design can only accommodate a 4/0.18 = 22-fold range in carcinogenic potency estimates. This would be reduced to an 11-fold range if the lowest dose (MTD/4) were omitted.

The strong negative association between the MDT and linearized upper bounds on the slope of the dose-response curve in the low dose region is demonstrated empirically in Figure 4 using the 191 carcinogens considered previously in section 3.1. Upper bounds based on both the multistage model and model-free extrapolation are highly correlated with the MDT, with Pearson correlation coefficients of -0.941 and -0.960 respectively.

5.2 Correlation Between q1* and the TD50

The fact that both the TD50 and q1* are correlated with the MTD implies a correlation between the TD50 and q1*. Krewski et al. (1989) provided empirical confirmation of this. An association between the TD50 and linearized estimates of low dose cancer risks has been previously assumed by other investigators. Rulis (1986) used simple linear extrapolation from TD50 values in the CPDB to estimate the 10-6 risk-specific doses (RSDs) for 343 chemical carcinogens. (The RSD is the dose associated with a specified increase in risk.) Similarly, by defining



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 136
APPENDIX F 136 original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. of the limited range of values q1* can assume once the MTD is established. This behavior is readily illustrated using model-free upper bounds on low dose risk proposed by Krewski et al. (1991a). The current NTP carcinogenesis screening bioassay generally consists of groups of 50 animals at doses of 0, D/4, D/2 and D = MTD. Using the model-free extrapolation (MFX) procedure with this design, the lowest estimate of potency would occur at the highest possible dose not exhibiting a statistically significant increase in tumor incidence. For carcinogens, there would be a statistically significant increase in the tumor incidence at least at the MTD. Hence, the lowest estimate of potency occurs when there are no tumors at the MTD/2. In this case, the MFX would yield an upper confidence limit on the low dose slope of approximately 0.09/ (MTD/2) = 0.18/MTD. The maximum estimate of the low dose slope would occur if the upper confidence limit on the incidence were 1.0 at the lowest dose, i.e., 1.0/(MTD/4) = 4/MTD. Using the MFX procedure, this design can only accommodate a 4/0.18 = 22-fold range in carcinogenic potency estimates. This would be reduced to an 11-fold range if the lowest dose (MTD/4) were omitted. The strong negative association between the MDT and linearized upper bounds on the slope of the dose-response curve in the low dose region is demonstrated empirically in Figure 4 using the 191 carcinogens considered previously in section 3.1. Upper bounds based on both the multistage model and model-free extrapolation are highly correlated with the MDT, with Pearson correlation coefficients of -0.941 and -0.960 respectively. 5.2 Correlation Between q1* and the TD50 The fact that both the TD50 and q1* are correlated with the MTD implies a correlation between the TD50 and q1*. Krewski et al. (1989) provided empirical confirmation of this. An association between the TD50 and linearized estimates of low dose cancer risks has been previously assumed by other investigators. Rulis (1986) used simple linear extrapolation from TD50 values in the CPDB to estimate the 10-6 risk-specific doses (RSDs) for 343 chemical carcinogens. (The RSD is the dose associated with a specified increase in risk.) Similarly, by defining

OCR for page 136
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.APPENDIX F FIGURE 4a Association between upper bounds on low dose slope and maximum tolerated dose. 137

OCR for page 136
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.APPENDIX F FIGURE 4b Association between upper bounds on low dose slope and maximum tolerated dose. 138