4.0 Review

A Review of the Molecular Mechanisms of Chemically Induced Neoplasia in Rat and Mouse Models in National Toxicology Program Bioassays and Their Relevance to Human Cancer

期刊

TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY
卷 37, 期 7, 页码 835-848

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0192623309351726

关键词

animal models; cancer; carcinogenesis; genotoxins/non-genotoxins; toxicologic pathology; rodent pathology; risk identification

资金

  1. NIH, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tumor response in the B6C3F1 mouse, F344 rat, and other animal models following exposure to various compounds provides evidence that people exposed to these or similar compounds may be at risk for developing cancer. Although tumors in rodents and humans are often morphologically similar, underlying mechanisms of tumorigenesis are often unknown and may be different between the species. Therefore, the relevance of an animal tumor response to human health would be better determined if the molecular pathogenesis were understood. The underlying molecular mechanisms leading to carcinogenesis are complex and involve multiple genetic and epigenetic events and other factors. To address the molecular pathogenesis of environmental carcinogens, the authors examine rodent tumors (e.g., lung, colon, mammary gland, skin, brain, mesothelioma) for alterations in cancer genes and epigenetic events that are associated with human cancer. National Toxicology Program (NTP) studies have identified several genetic alterations in chemically induced rodent neoplasms that are important in human cancer. Identification of such alterations in rodent models of chemical carcinogenesis caused by exposure to environmental contaminants, occupational chemicals, and other compounds lends further support that they are of potential human health risk. These studies also emphasize the importance of molecular evaluation of chemically induced rodent tumors for providing greater public health significance for NTP evaluated compounds.

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

4.0
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