Cargando…

The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.

A survey was performed on the results of 138 carcinogenicity studies conducted in various mouse strains by the agrochemical industry over the period 1983-1993. Data for liver tumor incidence, liver weight, and histopathology were collected along with data on genotoxicity. Studies were judged positiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carmichael, N G, Enzmann, H, Pate, I, Waechter, F
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 1997
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9370513
_version_ 1782127809224769536
author Carmichael, N G
Enzmann, H
Pate, I
Waechter, F
author_facet Carmichael, N G
Enzmann, H
Pate, I
Waechter, F
author_sort Carmichael, N G
collection PubMed
description A survey was performed on the results of 138 carcinogenicity studies conducted in various mouse strains by the agrochemical industry over the period 1983-1993. Data for liver tumor incidence, liver weight, and histopathology were collected along with data on genotoxicity. Studies were judged positive or negative for liver tumor formation on the basis of apparent dose response, malignancy, and difference from historical control values using a weight of evidence approach. Thirty-seven studies were judged to be positive for liver tumorigenicity in one or both sexes. There was no evidence showing an influence of the mouse strain and the duration of the study on the proportion of positive studies. Although 8 of the chemicals tested in the 138 studies were positive in the Ames test, only one of these was judged positive for carcinogenicity. Only 6 of the 37 positive chemicals had any other reported positive genotoxicity findings. A clear relationship between hepatomegaly at 1 year after exposure and a positive tumorigenic outcome at 18 months or 2 years after exposure was demonstrated. Whereas the average relative liver weight of top dose animals was 110% of control in negative studies, it was 150% in positive studies. Likewise, very few negative studies demonstrated significant pathological findings after 1 year, whereas the majority of positive studies had significant liver pathology. The implications of these findings for extrapolation to humans are discussed.
format Text
id pubmed-1470341
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 1997
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-14703412006-06-01 The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry. Carmichael, N G Enzmann, H Pate, I Waechter, F Environ Health Perspect Research Article A survey was performed on the results of 138 carcinogenicity studies conducted in various mouse strains by the agrochemical industry over the period 1983-1993. Data for liver tumor incidence, liver weight, and histopathology were collected along with data on genotoxicity. Studies were judged positive or negative for liver tumor formation on the basis of apparent dose response, malignancy, and difference from historical control values using a weight of evidence approach. Thirty-seven studies were judged to be positive for liver tumorigenicity in one or both sexes. There was no evidence showing an influence of the mouse strain and the duration of the study on the proportion of positive studies. Although 8 of the chemicals tested in the 138 studies were positive in the Ames test, only one of these was judged positive for carcinogenicity. Only 6 of the 37 positive chemicals had any other reported positive genotoxicity findings. A clear relationship between hepatomegaly at 1 year after exposure and a positive tumorigenic outcome at 18 months or 2 years after exposure was demonstrated. Whereas the average relative liver weight of top dose animals was 110% of control in negative studies, it was 150% in positive studies. Likewise, very few negative studies demonstrated significant pathological findings after 1 year, whereas the majority of positive studies had significant liver pathology. The implications of these findings for extrapolation to humans are discussed. 1997-11 /pmc/articles/PMC1470341/ /pubmed/9370513 Text en
spellingShingle Research Article
Carmichael, N G
Enzmann, H
Pate, I
Waechter, F
The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
title The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
title_full The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
title_fullStr The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
title_full_unstemmed The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
title_short The significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
title_sort significance of mouse liver tumor formation for carcinogenic risk assessment: results and conclusions from a survey of ten years of testing by the agrochemical industry.
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9370513
work_keys_str_mv AT carmichaelng thesignificanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT enzmannh thesignificanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT patei thesignificanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT waechterf thesignificanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT carmichaelng significanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT enzmannh significanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT patei significanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry
AT waechterf significanceofmouselivertumorformationforcarcinogenicriskassessmentresultsandconclusionsfromasurveyoftenyearsoftestingbytheagrochemicalindustry