Laboratory and Basic Science Research Commons^™

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 3. Alternatives To The Bioassay, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Conventional animal carcinogenicity tests take around three years to design, conduct and interpret. Consequently, only a tiny fraction of the thousands of industrial chemicals currently in use have been tested for carcinogenicity. Despite the costs of hundreds of millions of dollars and millions of skilled personnel hours, as well as millions of animal lives, several investigations have revealed that animal carcinogenicity data lack human specificity (i.e. the ability to identify human non-carcinogens), which severely limits the human predictivity of the bioassay. This is due to the scientific inadequacies of many carcinogenicity bioassays, and numerous serious biological obstacles, which render profoundly …

Cancerous Contradictions: The Mis-Regulation Of Human Carcinogens Based On Animal Data, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

The regulation of human exposures to potential carcinogens constitutes society’s most important use of animal carcinogenicity data. However, for environmental contaminants of greatest U.S. concern, we found that in most cases (58.1%; 93/160) the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considered the animal data inadequate to support a classification of probable human carcinogen or noncarcinogen.

The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is a leading international authority on carcinogenicity assessments. For chemicals lacking human exposure data (the great majority), IARC classifications of identical chemicals were significantly more conservative than EPA classifications (p

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 2. Obstacles To Extrapolation Of Data To Humans, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jarrod Bailey, PhD

Due to limited human exposure data, risk classification and the consequent regulation of exposure to potential carcinogens has conventionally relied mainly upon animal tests. However, several investigations have revealed animal carcinogenicity data to be lacking in human predictivity. To investigate the reasons for this, we surveyed 160 chemicals possessing animal but not human exposure data within the US Environmental Protection Agency chemicals database, but which had received human carcinogenicity assessments by 1 January 2004. We discovered the use of a wide variety of species, with rodents predominating, and of a wide variety of routes of administration, and that there were …

Cancerous Contradictions: The Mis-Regulation Of Human Carcinogens Based On Animal Data, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Andrew Knight, PhD

The regulation of human exposures to potential carcinogens constitutes society’s most important use of animal carcinogenicity data. However, for environmental contaminants of greatest U.S. concern, we found that in most cases (58.1%; 93/160) the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considered the animal data inadequate to support a classification of probable human carcinogen or noncarcinogen.

The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is a leading international authority on carcinogenicity assessments. For chemicals lacking human exposure data (the great majority), IARC classifications of identical chemicals were significantly more conservative than EPA classifications (p

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 3. Alternatives To The Bioassay, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Andrew Knight, Ph.D.

Conventional animal carcinogenicity tests take around three years to design, conduct and interpret. Consequently, only a tiny fraction of the thousands of industrial chemicals currently in use have been tested for carcinogenicity. Despite the costs of hundreds of millions of dollars and millions of skilled personnel hours, as well as millions of animal lives, several investigations have revealed that animal carcinogenicity data lack human specificity (i.e. the ability to identify human non-carcinogens), which severely limits the human predictivity of the bioassay. This is due to the scientific inadequacies of many carcinogenicity bioassays, and numerous serious biological obstacles, which render profoundly …

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 3. Alternatives To The Bioassay, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jonathan Balcombe, PhD

Conventional animal carcinogenicity tests take around three years to design, conduct and interpret. Consequently, only a tiny fraction of the thousands of industrial chemicals currently in use have been tested for carcinogenicity. Despite the costs of hundreds of millions of dollars and millions of skilled personnel hours, as well as millions of animal lives, several investigations have revealed that animal carcinogenicity data lack human specificity (i.e. the ability to identify human non-carcinogens), which severely limits the human predictivity of the bioassay. This is due to the scientific inadequacies of many carcinogenicity bioassays, and numerous serious biological obstacles, which render profoundly …

Animal Carcinogenicity Studies: 2. Obstacles To Extrapolation Of Data To Humans, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jonathan Balcombe, PhD

Due to limited human exposure data, risk classification and the consequent regulation of exposure to potential carcinogens has conventionally relied mainly upon animal tests. However, several investigations have revealed animal carcinogenicity data to be lacking in human predictivity. To investigate the reasons for this, we surveyed 160 chemicals possessing animal but not human exposure data within the US Environmental Protection Agency chemicals database, but which had received human carcinogenicity assessments by 1 January 2004. We discovered the use of a wide variety of species, with rodents predominating, and of a wide variety of routes of administration, and that there were …

Cancerous Contradictions: The Mis-Regulation Of Human Carcinogens Based On Animal Data, Andrew Knight, Jarrod Bailey, Jonathan Balcombe

Jonathan Balcombe, PhD

The regulation of human exposures to potential carcinogens constitutes society’s most important use of animal carcinogenicity data. However, for environmental contaminants of greatest U.S. concern, we found that in most cases (58.1%; 93/160) the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considered the animal data inadequate to support a classification of probable human carcinogen or noncarcinogen.

The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is a leading international authority on carcinogenicity assessments. For chemicals lacking human exposure data (the great majority), IARC classifications of identical chemicals were significantly more conservative than EPA classifications (p

A Roadmap For The Development Of Alternative (Non-Animal) Methods For Systemic Toxicity Testing, David Basketter, Harvey Clewell, Ian Kimber, Annamaria Rossi, Bas Blaauboer, Robert Burrier, Mardas Daneshian, Chantra Eskes, Alan Goldberg, Nina Hasiwa, Sebastian Hoffmann, Joanna Jaworska, Thomas B. Knudsen, Robert Landsiedel, Marcel Leist, Paul Locke, Gavin Maxwell, James Mckim, Emily Mcvey, Gladys Ouédraogo, Grace Patlewicz, Olavi Pelkonen, Erwin Roggen, Costanza Rovida, Irmela Ruhdel, Michael Schwarz, Andreas Schepky, Greet Schoeters, Nigel Skinner, Kerstin Trentz, Marian Turner, Philippe Vanparys, James Yager, Joanne Zurlo, Thomas Hartung

Biomedical Research and Alternative Methods Collection

Systemic toxicity testing forms the cornerstone for the safety evaluation of substances. Pressures to move from traditional animal models to novel technologies arise from various concerns, including: the need to evaluate large numbers of previously untested chemicals and new products (such as nanoparticles or cell therapies), the limited predictivity of traditional tests for human health effects, duration and costs of current approaches, and animal welfare considerations. The latter holds especially true in the context of the scheduled 2013 marketing ban on cosmetic ingredients tested for systemic toxicity. Based on a major analysis of the status of alternative methods (Adler et …