4.5 Review

Update on genotoxicity and carcinogenicity testing of 472 marketed pharmaceuticals

Journal

MUTATION RESEARCH-REVIEWS IN MUTATION RESEARCH
Volume 681, Issue 2-3, Pages 209-229

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2008.09.002

Keywords

Marketed drugs; Genotoxicity; Carcinogenicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This survey is a compendium of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity information of 838 marketed drugs, whose expected clinical use is continuous for at least 6 months or intermittent over an extended period of time. Of these 838 drugs, 366 (43.7%) do not have retrievable genotoxicity or carcinogenicity data. The remaining 472 (56.3%) have at least one genotoxicity or carcinogenicity test result. Of the 449 drugs with at least one genotoxicity test result, 183 (40.8%) have at least one positive finding. Of the 338 drugs with at least one carcinogenicity test result, 160 (47.3%) have at least one positive result. Concerning the predictivity of genetic toxicology findings for long-term carcinogenesis assays, of the 315 drugs which have both genotoxicity and carcinogenicity data 116 (36.8%) are neither genotoxic nor carcinogenic, 50 (15.9%) are non-carcinogens which test positive in at least one genotoxicity assay, 75 (23.8%) are carcinogenic in at least one sex of mice or rats but test negative in genotoxicity assays, and 74 (23.5%) are both genotoxic and carcinogenic. Only 208 (24.8%) of the 838 drugs considered have all data required by current guidelines for testing of pharmaceuticals. However, it should be noted that a large fraction of the drugs considered were developed and marketed prior to the present regulatory climate. Although the laws do not require re-testing based on revised standards, in the absence of epidemiological studies excluding a carcinogenic risk to humans, a re-evalutation would be appropriate. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available