Brusick D J
Hazleton Washington, Inc., Vienna, VA 22182.
Mutat Res. 1994 Apr;317(2):133-44. doi: 10.1016/0165-1110(94)90021-3.
The genetic toxicity of atrazine, a member of the s-triazine herbicides, was reviewed with the objective of classifying the chemical. Atrazine has been subjected to a broad range of genetic tests with predominantly negative results. Some publications, specifically those measuring dominant lethality in mice and bone marrow clastogenicity in rodents, reported conflicting results across two or more independent tests. Two approaches were employed to evaluate and interpret the results. The first approach attempts to classify each type of genetic endpoint as positive or negative and resolve test conflicts by critical assessment of the study and detailed data. This is the more traditional "expert judgement" approach to hazard assessment. The second approach employs a computer-assisted weight-of-evidence method of data analysis. This approach does not require resolution of conflicts but uses all data sets to arrive at a classification of hazard. The first approach was able to resolve some conflicts but not all. Use of the "expert judgement" results in an equivocal conclusion and classification. Use of the weight-of-evidence method resulted in a conclusion that atrazine does not pose a mutagenic hazard. The weight-of-evidence scheme is proposed to be a more practical and relevant approach for assessing complex data sets.
对三嗪类除草剂成员阿特拉津的遗传毒性进行了综述,目的是对该化学品进行分类。阿特拉津已接受了广泛的遗传测试,结果大多为阴性。一些出版物,特别是那些测量小鼠显性致死率和啮齿动物骨髓致裂性的研究,在两项或更多独立测试中报告了相互矛盾的结果。采用了两种方法来评估和解释结果。第一种方法试图将每种遗传终点分类为阳性或阴性,并通过对研究和详细数据的批判性评估来解决测试冲突。这是更传统的危害评估“专家判断”方法。第二种方法采用计算机辅助的证据权重数据分析方法。这种方法不需要解决冲突,而是使用所有数据集来得出危害分类。第一种方法能够解决一些冲突,但不是全部。使用“专家判断”得出了模棱两可的结论和分类。使用证据权重方法得出的结论是,阿特拉津不构成诱变危害。证据权重方案被认为是评估复杂数据集更实用和相关的方法。