Ginsberg Gary, Chen Ying, Vasiliou Vasilis
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Curr Opin Environ Sci Health. 2022 Dec;30. doi: 10.1016/j.coesh.2022.100407. Epub 2022 Oct 29.
The risk assessment of many carcinogens involves extrapolation across large exposure differences between the dose levels used in animal studies and the much lower human exposures. This is true for 1,4-dioxane which has a consistent liver carcinogenic effect in both genders of rats and mice. These data have been applied to risk assessment assuming a linear low dose extrapolation in some cases but non-linear or threshold models have been used in others. This choice hinges on our understanding of the 1,4-dioxane cancer mechanism. While 1,4-dioxane is not genotoxic in standard test batteries and has non-linear toxicokinetics, the mechanism for its carcinogenic effect remains unknown and is an active area of research. This review summarizes the possible modes of action for this chemical, data gaps and application to risk assessment. We find that the cytotoxicity/hyperplasia and metabolic saturation hypotheses do not explain the carcinogenic response and do not take into account 1,4-dioxane's induction of its own metabolism, leading to less likelihood for saturation during chronic exposure. There is evidence for other mechanisms, especially oxidative stress associated with the induction of CYP2E1 and in vivo genotoxicity that is not seen in vitro. The dose response for these effects needs further exploration compared to the time course and dose response for 1,4-dioxane-induced carcinogenesis. An additional consideration is the manner in which these 1,4-dioxane effects may augment naturally occurring and disease-related processes that contribute to the increasing rate of human liver cancer. These factors add to the rationale for using a non-threshold linear approach for extrapolating to low dose for this carcinogen, which is consistent with the default for carcinogens which do not have a clearly defined mode of action.
许多致癌物的风险评估涉及在动物研究中使用的剂量水平与低得多的人类暴露水平之间的大暴露差异外推。对于1,4 - 二氧六环来说就是如此,它在大鼠和小鼠的两性中都具有一致的肝脏致癌作用。在某些情况下,这些数据已应用于风险评估,假设采用线性低剂量外推,但在其他情况下也使用了非线性或阈值模型。这种选择取决于我们对1,4 - 二氧六环致癌机制的理解。虽然1,4 - 二氧六环在标准测试组合中没有遗传毒性且具有非线性毒代动力学,但其致癌作用的机制仍然未知,并且是一个活跃的研究领域。本综述总结了这种化学物质可能的作用模式、数据缺口以及在风险评估中的应用。我们发现细胞毒性/增生和代谢饱和假说无法解释致癌反应,也没有考虑到1,4 - 二氧六环对其自身代谢的诱导作用,导致在慢性暴露期间饱和的可能性较小。有证据表明存在其他机制,特别是与CYP2E1诱导相关的氧化应激和体外未见的体内遗传毒性。与1,4 - 二氧六环诱导致癌的时间进程和剂量反应相比,这些效应的剂量反应需要进一步探索。另一个需要考虑的是这些1,4 - 二氧六环效应可能增强自然发生的和与疾病相关的过程的方式,这些过程导致人类肝癌发病率上升。这些因素增加了对这种致癌物采用非阈值线性方法外推至低剂量的合理性,这与没有明确作用模式的致癌物的默认方法一致。