Lewis D F
Molecular Toxicology Group, School of Biological Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1994 Dec;20(3 Pt 1):215-22. doi: 10.1006/rtph.1994.1073.
A comparison is made between a number of predictive systems including bacterial mutagenicity, structure alert and chronic toxicity (Tennant et al., 1990), COMPACT, Hazardexpert, and DEREK, with the outcome of the two species rodent carcinogenicity bioassay for 44 chemicals conducted under the NTP protocol. It is shown that, following minor updating of the rodent data in the light of pathology reports, there is a generally good agreement between various predictions and the actual carcinogenicity results. In particular, a combination of two methods of prediction produces an over 80% concordance with the rodent bioassay. Possible reasons for various discrepancies are discussed in light of xenobiotic metabolism and activation mechanisms of chemical carcinogenesis.
对包括细菌诱变性、结构警示和慢性毒性(Tennant等人,1990年)、COMPACT、Hazardexpert和DEREK在内的多种预测系统,与根据NTP协议对44种化学品进行的两种啮齿动物致癌性生物测定的结果进行了比较。结果表明,根据病理报告对啮齿动物数据进行少量更新后,各种预测结果与实际致癌性结果总体上有较好的一致性。特别是,两种预测方法的组合与啮齿动物生物测定的一致性超过80%。根据化学致癌作用的外源性物质代谢和激活机制,讨论了各种差异的可能原因。