Hormesis: changing view of the dose-response, a personal account of the history and current status.

This paper provides a personal account of the history of the hormesis concept, and of the role of the dose response in toxicology and pharmacology. A careful evaluation of the toxicology and pharmacology literatures suggests that the biphasic dose response that characterizes hormesis may be much more widespread than is commonly recognized, and may come to rival our currently favored ideas about toxicological dose responses confined to the linear and threshold representations used in risk assessment. Although hormesis-like biphasic dose responses were already well-established in chemical and radiation toxicology by the early decades of the 20th century, they were all but expunged from mainstream toxicology in the 1930s. The reasons may be found in a complex set of unrelated problems of which difficulties in replication of low-dose stimulatory responses resulting from poor study designs, greater societal interest in high-dose effects, linking of the concept of hormesis to the practice of homeopathy, and perhaps most crucially a complete lack of strong leadership to advocate its acceptance in the right circles. I believe that if hormesis achieves widespread recognition as a valid and valuable interpretation of dose-response results, we would expect an increase in the breadth of evaluations of the dose-response relationship which could be of great value in hazard and risk assessment as well as in future approaches to drug development and/or chemotherapeutics.

[1]  Edward J. Calabrese,et al.  Radiation Hormesis and Cancer , 2002 .

[2]  L. J. Cole,et al.  Urethan-induced lung tumors in mice: x-radiation dose dependent inhibition. USNRDL-TR-911. , 1965, Research and development technical report. United States. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, San Francisco.

[3]  E. Calabrese,et al.  Tales of two similar hypotheses: the rise and fall of chemical and radiation hormesis , 2000, Human & experimental toxicology.

[4]  E J Calabrese,et al.  Radiation hormesis: its historical foundations as a biological hypothesis , 2000, Human & experimental toxicology.

[5]  R. Ullrich,et al.  Neutron carcinogenesis. Dose and dose-rate effects in BALB/c mice. , 1977, Radiation research.

[6]  E. Calabrese,et al.  The frequency of U-shaped dose responses in the toxicological literature. , 2001, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[7]  C. Wade,et al.  Results of a two-year chronic toxicity and oncogenicity study of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in rats. , 1978, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[8]  E J Calabrese,et al.  The marginalization of hormesis , 2000, Toxicologic pathology.

[9]  R. Ullrich,et al.  The influence of dose and dose rate on the incidence of neoplastic disease in RFM mice after neutron irradiation. , 1976, Radiation research.

[10]  Thomas D. Luckey,et al.  Hormesis with Ionizing Radiation , 2019 .

[11]  N. Mantel,et al.  Induction of tumors in mice given a minute single dose of dibenz[a,h]anthracene or 3-methylcholanthrene as newborns. A dose-response study. , 1965, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[12]  E J Calabrese,et al.  Chemical hormesis: its historical foundations as a biological hypothesis , 2000, Human & experimental toxicology.

[13]  E. Calabrese,et al.  The Dose Determines the Stimulation (and Poison): Development of A Chemical Hormesis Database , 1997 .

[14]  R. Ullrich,et al.  Influence of gamma irradiation on the development of neoplastic disease in mice. II. Solid tumors. , 1979, Radiation research.

[15]  E. Calabrese,et al.  Can the concept of hormesis Be generalized to carcinogenesis? , 1998, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[16]  E. Calabrese,et al.  Radiation hormesis: the demise of a legitimate hypothesis , 2000, Human & experimental toxicology.