Procter & Gamble, Mason, OH, USA.
Imperial College London, London, UK.
Crit Rev Toxicol. 2020 Jan;50(1):72-95. doi: 10.1080/10408444.2020.1727843. Epub 2020 Mar 5.
The European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) organized a workshop "" to explore the scientific limitations of the current binary carcinogenicity classification scheme that classifies substances as either carcinogenic or not. Classification is often based upon the rodent 2-year bioassay, which has scientific limitations and is not necessary to predict whether substances are likely human carcinogens. By contrast, tiered testing strategies founded on new approach methodologies (NAMs) followed by subchronic toxicity testing, as necessary, are useful to determine if a substance is likely carcinogenic, by which mode-of-action effects would occur and, for non-genotoxic carcinogens, the dose levels below which the key events leading to carcinogenicity are not affected. Importantly, the objective is not for NAMs to mimic high-dose effects recorded , as these are not relevant to human risk assessment. Carcinogenicity testing at the "maximum tolerated dose" does not reflect human exposure conditions, but causes major disturbances of homeostasis, which are very unlikely to occur at relevant human exposure levels. The evaluation of findings should consider biological relevance and not just statistical significance. Using this approach, safe exposures to non-genotoxic substances can be established.
欧洲生态毒理学和化学毒物学中心(ECETOC)组织了一次研讨会,旨在探讨当前将物质分为致癌或非致癌的二元致癌性分类方案的科学局限性。分类通常基于啮齿动物 2 年生物测定,该方法具有科学局限性,并且没有必要预测物质是否可能对人类致癌。相比之下,基于新方法学(NAMs)的分层测试策略,必要时进行亚慢性毒性测试,有助于确定物质是否具有致癌性,以及作用机制效应将如何发生,对于非遗传毒性致癌物质,低于哪个剂量水平不会影响导致致癌性的关键事件。重要的是,目标不是让 NAMs 模拟高剂量效应,因为这些与人类风险评估无关。在“最大耐受剂量”下进行致癌性测试并不反映人类暴露条件,而是导致内稳态的重大紊乱,而这些在相关的人类暴露水平下极不可能发生。评估结果应考虑生物学相关性,而不仅仅是统计学意义。使用这种方法,可以确定非遗传毒性物质的安全暴露水平。