National Academies Press: OpenBook

Issues in Risk Assessment (1993)

Chapter: 1. INTRODUCTION

« Previous: Appendix E Workshop Attendees
Suggested Citation:"1. INTRODUCTION." National Research Council. 1993. Issues in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2078.
×

Appendix F
Correlation Between Carcinogenic Potency and the Maximum Tolerated Dose: Implications for Risk Assessment

D. Krewski,1,2 D.W. Gaylor3, A.P. Soms4,5 & M. Szyszkowicz1

Current practice in carcinogen bioassay calls for exposure of experimental animals at doses up to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Such studies have been used to compute measures of carcinogenic potency such as the TD50 as well as unit risk factors such as q*/1 for predicting low dose risks. Recent studies have indicated that these measures of carcinogenic potency are highly correlated with the MTD. Carcinogenic potency has also been shown to be correlated with indicators of mutagenicity and toxicity. Correlation of the MTDs for rats and mice implies a corresponding correlation in TD50 values for these two species. The implications of these results for cancer risk assessment are examined in light of the large variation in potency among chemicals known to induce tumors in rodents.

1. Introduction

Carcinogen bioassay is an important source of information on the potential carcinogenic effects of chemicals. Current practice involves the exposure of animals at doses up to the maximum tolerated dose

Suggested Citation:"1. INTRODUCTION." National Research Council. 1993. Issues in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2078.
×

(MTD), defined as that dose which can be administered to rodents over the course of a lifetime without appreciably altering body weight or survival other than as a result of tumor occurrence (Munro, 1977). High doses such as the MTD are used to enhance tumor response rates, thereby increasing the likelihood of observing elevated tumor occurrence rates in a small sample of experimental animals. In this regard, Haseman (1985) has shown that more than two-thirds of the carcinogenic effects detected in feeding studies conducted under the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) would have been missed if the highest dose had been restricted to one-half of the MTD.

The use of such high doses in animal cancer tests has been the subject of considerable debate (cf. McConnell, 1989). In particular, it has been argued that biochemical and physiological distortions occurring at high doses may lead to toxicity-induced carcinogenic effects that might not be expected to occur at lower doses (Carr & Kolbye, 1991; Clayson et al., 1992). Ames & Gold (1990) have suggested that high dose stimulation of mitogenesis will enhance mutagenesis, leading to the identification of rodent carcinogens that may not present a human health risk. Apostolou (1990) questioned the necessity of using the MTD in animal cancer tests on the grounds that many human carcinogens can be identified in animal tests at doses of one-half of the MTD or less.

Suggestions for redefining the high dose to be used in animal cancer tests to circumvent these issues have been made (Apostolou, 1990; Carr & Kolbye, 1991). Clayson et al. (1992) considered such proposals, but recommended retaining the MTD, while recognizing that nongenotoxic carcinogens that appear to be effective in animals only at high doses may not present a risk to humans exposed to much lower doses (cf. Butter-worth, 1990). Since the definition of the maximum dose to be used in animal cancer tests is of secondary importance for our present purposes, we make no attempt to resolve this issue here. Instead, the reader is referred to the recent report by the National Research Council (1992), which considers the definition of the maximum dose to be used in detail.

The completion of several hundred bioassays over the past two decades has resulted in the availability of a large data base that may be used in global analyses of bioassay data. Recent analyses have revealed that the MTD is highly correlated with quantitative measures of carcinogenic potency such as the TD50 (Bernstein et al., 1985; Reith and Starr, 1989a), defined as the dose that reduces the proportion of tumor-free animals by 50% (Peto et al., 1984).

Suggested Citation:"1. INTRODUCTION." National Research Council. 1993. Issues in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2078.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"1. INTRODUCTION." National Research Council. 1993. Issues in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/2078.
×
Page 112
Next: 2.1 Measures of Carcinogenic Potency »
Issues in Risk Assessment Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $65.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The scientific basis, inference assumptions, regulatory uses, and research needs in risk assessment are considered in this two-part volume.

The first part, Use of Maximum Tolerated Dose in Animal Bioassays for Carcinogenicity, focuses on whether the maximum tolerated dose should continue to be used in carcinogenesis bioassays. The committee considers several options for modifying current bioassay procedures.

The second part, Two-Stage Models of Carcinogenesis, stems from efforts to identify improved means of cancer risk assessment that have resulted in the development of a mathematical dose-response model based on a paradigm for the biologic phenomena thought to be associated with carcinogenesis.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!