National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$49.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Issues in Risk Assessment (1993)
Commission on Life Sciences (CLS)

Citation Manager

. "DATA." Issues in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1993.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
177
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Issues in Risk Assessment
DATA

Twelve of the candidates were already included in the CPDB and in Krewski's study (upper portion of Table G-2). For two other agents (benzo[a]pyrene and 1, 3-butadiene), the committee identified dose--response data that could be analyzed quantitatively (Tables G-3 and G-4). For another agent (vinyl chloride), the committee identified an ingestion study that gave results (Table G-5) markedly different from those of the inhalation study included in the first part of Table G-2. The ingestion study (Feron et al., 1981) appears to have met the inclusion criteria of the CPDB, and it is not clear why it was not included in the CPDB. The data in Tables G-3, G-4, and G-5 were analyzed by Krewski with the same methods as those used in his workshop paper, and the resulting estimates of TD50 are tabulated in the lower portion of Table G-2.

For four agents listed in Table G-1, comparable numerical estimates of carcinogenic potency could not be obtained, for the following reasons:

  • Dimethyl sulfate. The only reported studies are unsuitable for quantitative analysis, but show tumors at the MDT and MDT/2 (IARC, 1974).

  • Dibenz[a,h]anthracene. The only reported studies are unsuitable for quantitative analysis (ATSDR, 1990).

  • Methyl bromide. Data purporting to show induction of forestomach tumors within 90 days (Danse et al., 1984) have been discredited (EPA, 1986; Reuzel et al., 1991).

  • Plutonium. Dose data on this and other radionuclides are not commensurable with those customarily applied to chemical carcinogens. For plutonium, the radiation dose that causes early death (within 1.5 years) due to radiation pneumonitis and pulmonary fibrosis in animals exposed by inhalation is about 45 Gy (Scott et al., 1990), whereas the TD 50 for animals similarly exposed is 3.3 Gy (Diehl et al., 1992). (In this case, early death is used as the measure of toxicity for the purpose of determining the MTD.)

Page
177
Front Matter (R1-R18)
Executive Summary (1-2)
USE OF THE MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE IN ANIMAL BIOASSAYS FOR CARCINOGENICITY (3-8)
THE TWO-STAGE MODEL OF CARCINOGENESIS (9-9)
A PARADIGM FOR ECOLOGIC RISK ASSESSMENT (10-12)
Issues In Risk Assessment Use Of Maximum Tolerated Dose in Animal Bioassays for Carcinogenicity (13-14)
BACKGROUND (15-17)
SCOPE OF REPORT (18-20)
DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND (21-23)
CORRELATIONS (24-32)
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TOXICITY AND CARCINOGENICITY OBSERVED AT MTD (33-42)
QUALITATIVE INFORMATION (43-48)
QUANTITATIVE INFORMATION (49-52)
OPTION 1 (53-53)
OPTION 2 (54-54)
OPTION 3 (55-56)
Option 4A (57-58)
Option 4B (59-60)
5 Conclusions and Recommendations (61-66)
REFERENCES (67-78)
BACKGROUND (79-79)
DEFINING AND DETERMINING THE MTD (80-90)
Appendix B Organizing Subcommittee (91-92)
Appendix C Federal Liaison Group (93-94)
Appendix D Workshop Program (95-96)
Appendix E Workshop Attendees (97-110)
1. INTRODUCTION (111-112)
2.1 Measures of Carcinogenic Potency (113-115)
2.2 Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB) (116-116)
2.3 Variation in Carcinogen Potency (117-118)
2.4 Classification of Carcinogens (119-120)
3.1 Empirical Correlations (121-124)
3.2 Range of Possible TD50 Values (125-125)
3.3 Analytical Correlations (126-127)
3.4 Model Dependency (128-129)
3.5 Genotoxic vs. Nongenotoxic Carcinogens (130-130)
4.1 Predictions Based on the MDT (131-131)
4.2 Predictions Based on Mutagenicity and Acute Toxicity (132-134)
5.1 Correlation Between Upper Bounds On the Low Dose Slope and MTD (135-135)
5.2 Correlation Between q1* and the TD50 (136-138)
5.3. Preliminary Estimate of Risk (139-139)
6. INTERSPECIES EXTRAPOLATION (140-140)
6.1 Extrapolation from Rats to Mice (141-143)
6.2 Extrapolation from Rodents to Humans (144-145)
7. CONCLUSIONS (146-148)
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (149-149)
9. REFERENCES (150-159)
ANNEX A: MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHODS FOR FITTING THE WEIBULL MODEL (160-161)
ANNEX B. SHRINKAGE ESTIMATORS OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF CARCINOGENIC POTENCY (162-163)
ANNEX C: ADJUSTMENT OF POTENCY VALUES FOR LESS THAN LIFETIME EXPOSURE (164-165)
ANNEX D: CORRELATION BETWEEN TD50 AND MTD (166-168)
ANNEX E: CORRELATION BETWEEN TD50S FOR RATS AND MICE (169-172)
Appendix G Informal Search for ''Supercarcinogens" (173-174)
CRITERIA AND CANDIDATE CHEMICALS (175-176)
DATA (177-180)
RESULTS (181-181)
DISCUSSION (182-184)
Issues in Risk Assessment The Two-Stage Model Of Carcinogenesis (185-186)
INTRODUCTION (187-187)
BIOLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS (188-189)
THE TWO-STAGE MODEL (190-195)
APPLICATIONS OF THE TWO-STAGE MODEL TO ANIMAL DATA (196-211)
Data Needs (212-212)
Criteria for Adoption (213-213)
Prospects (214-214)
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (215-216)
REFERENCES (217-222)
BIOLOGICAL FACTORS IN TWO-STAGE MODELS (223-225)
TWO-STAGE MODEL OF CLONAL EXPANSION (226-227)
APPLICATION OF THE TWO-STAGE MODEL TO ANIMAL DATA (228-232)
Appendix B Workshop Program (233-234)
Appendix C Workshop Federal Liaison Group (235-236)
TOPIC GROUP MEMBERS (237-238)
Appendix E Workshop Organizing Task Group (239-240)
Isuees In Risk Assessment A Paradigm for Ecological Risk Assessment (241-242)
1 Introduction (243-246)
2 Scope of Ecological Risk Assessment (247-248)
COMPONENTS OF THE 1983 FRAMEWORK (249-250)
CONSISTENCY OF CASE STUDIES WITH THE 1983 FRAMEWORK (251-253)
INTEGRATION OF ECOLOGICAL RISK INTO THE 1983 FRAMEWORK (254-254)
DEFINITION OF FRAMEWORK COMPONENTS FOR ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT (255-258)
EXTRAPOLATION ACROSS SCALES (259-260)
QUANTIFICATION OF UNCERTAINTY (261-261)
VALIDATION OF PREDICTIVE TOOLS (262-262)
VALUATION (263-264)
5 Conclusions (265-266)
6 Recommendations (267-268)
REFERENCES (269-272)
Appendix A Workshop Participants (273-278)
Appendix B Workshop Organizing Subcommittee and Federal Liaison Group (279-280)
Appendix C Workshop Introduction (281-282)
TERRY F. YOSIE BUILDING ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT AS A POLICY TOOL (283-285)
D. WARNER NORTH: RELATIONSHIP OF WORKSHOP TO NRC'S 1983 RED BOOK REPORT (286-288)
MICHAEL SLIMAK: U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ACTIVITIES IN ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT (289-292)
CASE STUDY 1: TRIBUTYLTIN RISK MANAGEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES (293-293)
Discussion (294-294)
CASE STUDY 2: ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE EXPOSED TO AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS (295-296)
CASE STUDY 3A: MODELS OF TOXIC CHEMICALS IN THE GREAT LAKES: STRUCTURE, APPLICATIONS, AND UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS (297-298)
CASE STUDY 3B: ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF TCDD AND TCDF (299-299)
Discussion (300-300)
CASE STUDY 4: RISK ASSESSMENT METHODS IN ANIMAL POPULATIONS: THE NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL AS AN EXAMPLE (301-301)
Discussion (302-302)
CASE STUDY 5: ECOLOGICAL BENEFITS AND RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INTRODUCTION OF EXOTIC SPECIES FOR BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF A... (303-303)
Discussion (304-304)
CASE STUDY 1: UNCERTAINTY AND RISK IN AN EXPLOITED ECOSYSTEM: A CASE STUDY OF GEORGES BANK (305-306)
Discussion (307-308)
Generic Issues (309-309)
Analysis of Case Studies (310-310)
DOSE-RESPONSE ASSESSMENT (311-311)
Selection of End Points (312-312)
Consideration of Nonlinearities And Discontinuities (313-313)
Understanding the Stressor (314-314)
Additions to the 1983 Paradigm Needed for Ecological Risk Assessment (315-315)
Modeling Needs for Stress-Response Relationships (316-316)
Methods of Measuring Stressors for Ecological Exposure Assessment (317-317)
Definition of Risk Characterization (318-318)
Components of Risk Characterization (319-319)
Organization and Presentation (320-320)
Differences from and Similarities To the 1983 Report (321-321)
Application to the Case Studies (322-323)
Agricultural Chemicals (324-324)
Northern Spotted Owl (325-325)
General Discussion: Models and Risk Assessment (326-326)
Uncertainties Identified In the Case Studies (327-327)
Implications of Uncertainty for Ecological Risk Assessment (328-328)
VALUATION (329-330)
Risk Assessment Has Many Uses (331-332)
Different Risk Assessment Methods Are Suited to Different Risk Assessment Needs (333-333)
Risk Assessors and Risk Managers Need to Communicate (334-334)
Credibility is Crucial (335-336)
Appendix G Contemplations on Ecological Risk Assessment (337-342)
Appendix H Workshop Summary (343-346)
Appendix I References for Appendixes (347-350)
Appendix J Workshop Program (351-356)

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 177
Issues in Risk Assessment DATA Twelve of the candidates were already included in the CPDB and in Krewski's study (upper portion of Table G-2). For two other agents (benzo[a]pyrene and 1, 3-butadiene), the committee identified dose--response data that could be analyzed quantitatively (Tables G-3 and G-4). For another agent (vinyl chloride), the committee identified an ingestion study that gave results (Table G-5) markedly different from those of the inhalation study included in the first part of Table G-2. The ingestion study (Feron et al., 1981) appears to have met the inclusion criteria of the CPDB, and it is not clear why it was not included in the CPDB. The data in Tables G-3, G-4, and G-5 were analyzed by Krewski with the same methods as those used in his workshop paper, and the resulting estimates of TD50 are tabulated in the lower portion of Table G-2. For four agents listed in Table G-1, comparable numerical estimates of carcinogenic potency could not be obtained, for the following reasons: Dimethyl sulfate. The only reported studies are unsuitable for quantitative analysis, but show tumors at the MDT and MDT/2 (IARC, 1974). Dibenz[a,h]anthracene. The only reported studies are unsuitable for quantitative analysis (ATSDR, 1990). Methyl bromide. Data purporting to show induction of forestomach tumors within 90 days (Danse et al., 1984) have been discredited (EPA, 1986; Reuzel et al., 1991). Plutonium. Dose data on this and other radionuclides are not commensurable with those customarily applied to chemical carcinogens. For plutonium, the radiation dose that causes early death (within 1.5 years) due to radiation pneumonitis and pulmonary fibrosis in animals exposed by inhalation is about 45 Gy (Scott et al., 1990), whereas the TD 50 for animals similarly exposed is 3.3 Gy (Diehl et al., 1992). (In this case, early death is used as the measure of toxicity for the purpose of determining the MTD.)

OCR for page 178
Issues in Risk Assessment TABLE G-2 Deviations from Krewski's Regressions   Gold's Estimate (one-stage, time-corrected) Krewski's Estimate (one-stage, time-corrected) Krewski's Case No. Chemical MTD log MTD TD50 log TD50 Predicted log TD50 Difference Standardized Difference TD50 log TD50 Predicted log TD50 Difference Standardized Difference 2 2-Acetyl-amino-fluorene 10.0 1.00 3.78 0.577 0.835 -0.318 -0.582 3.83 0.583 0.895 -0.312 -0.572 3 Acrylonitrile 5.69 0.755 5.31 0.725 0.647 0.078 0.144 5.61 0.755 0.647 0.102 0.187 1 Benzidine 80.0 1.903 8.99 0.954 1.811 -0.857 -1.571 9.10 0.959 1.811 -0.851 -1.561 3 C.I. Direct Black 38 60.0 1.778 0.945 -0.025 1.684 -1.708 -3.132 0.99 -0.002 1.684 -1.688 -3.095 6 C.I. Direct Blue 6 60.0 1.778 1.18 0.072 1.684 -1.612 -2.955 1.17 0.068 1.684 -1.616 -3.962 8 C.I. Direct Brown 95 75.0 1.875 2.07 0.316 1.782 -1.466 -2.688 2.62 0.418 1.782 -1.364 -2.500 3 CCl4 1650 3.217 114 2.057 3.143 -1.086 -1.991 115.12 2.061 3.143 -1.082 -1.983 3 EDB 28.1 1.449 1.26 0.100 1.350 -1.250 -2.291 5.60 0.748 1.350 -0.608 -1.103 1 ENU 0.429 -3.68 0.904 -0.044 -0.491 0.447 0.820 0.94 -0.026 -0.491 0.464 0.851 2 Ethylene 6.11 0.786 7.43 0.871 0.678 0.193 0.354 7.69 0.786 0.678 0.208 0.381 9 MOCA 34.0 1.531 20.8 1.318 1.434 -0.116 -0.212 21.07 1.324 1.434 -0.110 -0.202 13 Vinyl chloride (CPDB) 0.279 -0.554 14.2 1.152 -0.681 1.833 3.360 33.52 1.525 -0.681 2.206 4.044

OCR for page 179
Issues in Risk Assessment   Gold's Estimate (one-stage, time-corrected) Krewski's Estimate (one-stage, time-corrected) Krewski's Case No. Chemical MTD log MTD TD50 log TD50 Predicted log TD50 Difference Standardized Difference TD50 log TD50 Predicted log TD50 Difference Standardized Difference Chemicals or studies not in the CPDB or in Krewski's analysis   Benzo[a]-pyrene 32.5 1.512           11.70 1.068 1.414 -0.346 -0.634   1,3-Butadiene () 380 2.580           20.81 1.318 2.496 -1.178 -2.160   Vinly Chloride (CRAM) 14.1 1.149           4.89 0.689 1.046 -0.357 -0.654

OCR for page 180
Issues in Risk Assessment TABLE G-3 1,3 Butadiene*   Dose Rate (mg/kg-d) Tumor Incidence   Males Females Lymphocytic lymphoma 0 2/70 2/70   3.8 1/70 4/70   12 2/70 6/70   38 4/70 3/70   120 2/70 11/70   380 62/90 36/90 *Inhalation exposure, 6h/day, 5d/wk for up to 2 years. Most animals died in high exposure groups by 65 weeks because of high tumor incidence. Source: Melnick et al., 1990. TABLE G-4 Benzo[a]pyrene*   Dose Rate (mg/kg-d) Tumor Incidence Male and Female Stomach, squamous cell carcinomas and papillomas 0 0/289 0.13 0/25 1.3 0/24 2.6 1/23 3.9 0/37 5.2 1/40 5.85 4/40 6.5 24/34 13.0 19/23 32.5 66/73 *Oral exposure in diet. Mice, CFW, male and female. Duration of exposure: 110 days. Duration of experiment: 183 days. Source: Neal and Rigdon, 1967.