4.4 Review

A review of whole animal bioassays of the carcinogenic potential of naphthalene

期刊

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 S6-S14

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2007.09.022

关键词

naphthalene; animal bioassay; National Toxicology Program (NTP); cancer; carcinogenesis; tumorigenesis; cytotoxicity; maximum tolerated dose (MTD); inhalation studies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This report provides a summary of deliberations conducted under the charge for members of Module A participating in the Naphthalene State-of-the-Science Symposium (NS3), Monterey, CA, October 9-12, 2006. Whole animal bioassays have been performed by the National Toxicology Program in mice and rats to ascertain the carcinogenic potential of naphthalene by inhalation exposure. A statistically significant increased incidence of pulmonary alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma (a benign lesion), was observed among female mice; an observed increase among the males did not reach statistical significance. No nasal tumors were observed in either sex. A tumorigenic response was observed in both sexes of rats, in males an increased incidence of nasal respiratory epithelium adenoma (a benign rather than malignant lesion) and in females, olfactory epithelial neuroblastoma. Interpretations of these studies vary. On the one hand, evidence of extensive non-neoplastic response in both sexes of both species indicates cytotoxicity occurred at all doses, and strongly suggests that cytotoxicity played a significant role in the tumor responses observed in the target tissues. On the other hand, olfactory epithelial neuroblastoma has rarely been observed in NTP bioassays. This review seeks to develop a consensus understanding of the scientific evidence provided by these studies, taking into account that they have been used as the basis for quantitative human cancer risk assessment, and suggests scientific studies that, if performed, could resolve scientific uncertainties. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据