Alternative models for carcinogenicity testing.

The International Conference on Harmonisation Expert Working Group on Safety suggested that under certain circumstances, data from alternative assays could be used in safety evaluation in place of a second bioassay. Several alternatives were discussed. Six of these models were evaluated in a collaborative effort under the auspices of the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) branch of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI). Standard protocols, pathology review, and statistical evaluations were developed. Twenty-one chemicals were evaluated, including genotoxic, nongenotoxic, carcinogenic, and noncarcinogenic chemicals. The models that were evaluated included the p53(+/-) heterozygous knockout mouse, the rasH2 transgenic mouse, the TgAC transgenic mouse (dermal and oral administration), the homozygous XPA knockout and the XPA/p53 knockout mouse models. Also evaluated were the neonatal mouse models and the Syrian Hamster Embryo (SHE) transformation assay. The results of this comprehensive study suggest that some of these models might be useful in hazard identification if used in conjunction with information from other sources in a weight of evidence, integrated analysis approach to risk assessment.

[1]  S. Johansson,et al.  Uroepithelial tumors of the renal pelvis associated with abuse of phenacetin‐containing analgesics , 1974, Cancer.

[2]  I. Purchase,et al.  Workshop Overview: Scientific and Regulatory Challenges for the Reduction, Refinement, and Replacement of Animals in Toxicity Testing 1 , 1998 .

[3]  R. Tennant,et al.  Identifying chemical carcinogens and assessing potential risk in short-term bioassays using transgenic mouse models. , 1995, Environmental health perspectives.

[4]  I. Purchase,et al.  Workshop overview: scientific and regulatory challenges for the reduction, refinement, and replacement of animals in toxicity testing. , 1998, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[5]  R. Tennant,et al.  Review Article: Use of Transgenic Animals for Carcinogenicity Testing: Considerations and Implications for Risk Assessment , 2000 .

[6]  J. P. Van Oosterhout,et al.  The utility of two rodent species in carcinogenic risk assessment of pharmaceuticals in Europe. , 1997, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[7]  A. Monro,et al.  Marketed Human Pharmaceuticals Reported to be Tumorigenic in Rodents , 1995 .

[8]  D. Rall.  LABORATORY ANIMAL TESTS AND HUMAN CANCER* , 2000, Drug metabolism reviews.

[9]  P Fenner-Crisp,et al.  Do peroxisome proliferating compounds pose a hepatocarcinogenic hazard to humans? , 1998, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[10]  P. Fu,et al.  Neonatal mouse assay for tumorigenicity: alternative to the chronic rodent bioassay. , 1997, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[11]  R. Maronpot,et al.  Rodent Carcinogenicity Bioassay: Past, Present, and Future , 1994, Toxicologic pathology.

[12]  J. Contrera,et al.  Carcinogenicity testing and the evaluation of regulatory requirements for pharmaceuticals. , 1997, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.