Sielken R L, Reitz R H, Hays S M
Sielken, Inc., Bryan, TX 77802, USA.
Toxicology. 1996 Oct 28;113(1-3):231-7. doi: 10.1016/0300-483x(96)03450-6.
The National Academy of Sciences and many others have noted the need for quantitative health risk assessment methodology that goes beyond a simple screening analysis based on upper bounds on risk. The Academy recommended adoption of methodologies which provide a higher-tier analysis based on realistic estimates of risk which reflect more of the available biological information. In recent years, scientists have challenged the assumption of low-dose linearity and other default assumptions in cancer risk assessment. These challenges have stimulated the continued evolution of quantitative risk assessment methodologies, because effective risk management requires accurate characterizations of uncertainty and greater utilization of cost-benefit analyses for decision making. "Comprehensive Realism" is an emerging quantitative weight-of-evidence based risk assessment methodology for both cancer and noncancer health effects which utilizes probability distributions and decision analysis techniques to reflect more of the available human and animal dose-response data. The current state of knowledge about the relative plausibility of alternative dose-response analyses is also addressed in this approach. The framework discussed here should lead to a higher-tier assessment of butadiene.
美国国家科学院和其他许多机构都指出,需要一种定量健康风险评估方法,这种方法要超越基于风险上限的简单筛查分析。该科学院建议采用基于风险实际估计值的更高层次分析方法,这些估计值能反映更多可用的生物学信息。近年来,科学家们对癌症风险评估中低剂量线性假设和其他默认假设提出了质疑。这些质疑推动了定量风险评估方法的持续发展,因为有效的风险管理需要准确描述不确定性,并在决策中更多地利用成本效益分析。“综合现实主义”是一种新兴的基于证据权重的定量风险评估方法,用于评估癌症和非癌症健康影响,它利用概率分布和决策分析技术来反映更多可用的人类和动物剂量反应数据。这种方法还涉及了关于替代剂量反应分析相对合理性的当前知识状态。这里讨论的框架应该会带来对丁二烯的更高层次评估。