Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (80)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ennever, F. K.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenkranz, H. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ennever, F. K.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenkranz, H. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Mutagenesis vol. 2 no. 2 pp. 73-78, 1987
© 1987 UK Environmental Mutagen Society/Oxford University Press

discussion

The predictivity of animal bioassays and short-term genotoxicity tests for carcinogenicity and non-carcinogenicity to humans

Fanny K. Ennever, Thomas J. Noonan and Herbert S. Rosenkranz

Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, School of Medicine Cleveland, OH 44106, USA

The successful use of surrogate tests to predict whether a chemical may be carcinogenic to humans requires that the tests be both sensitive (few false negatives) and specific (few false positives). To assess specificity, results for non-carcinogens must be compared. Although no chemicals have been definitively shown not to cause cancer in humans, we have identified 29 chemicals for which some evidence of non-carcinogenicity exists in evaluations by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Twenty of these probable non-carcinogens have been tested for rodent carcinogenicity in animal bioassays; 19 were positive and only one was negative, indicating that the specificity of animal bioassays is low. The sensitivity of animal bioassays, however, is very high: all definite human carcinogens adequately tested were positive. Most short-term tests which measure genotoxicity or transformation also had low specificity; however, four tests gave predominantly negative results for probable human non-carcinogens as well as predominantly positive results for definite human carcinogens. These results are based on comparison of small numbers of chemicals, but do suggest the need for more investigation of the relationships of genotoxicity and rodent carcinogenicity to carcinogenicity in humans.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Toxicol SciHome page
T. Hartung and G. Daston
Are In Vitro Tests Suitable for Regulatory Use?
Toxicol. Sci., October 1, 2009; 111(2): 233 - 237.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
S Hoffmann and T Hartung
Toward an evidence-based toxicology
Human and Experimental Toxicology, September 1, 2006; 25(9): 497 - 513.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
A. Knight, J. Bailey, J. Balcombe, W. H Farland, B. Rodan, and P. Preuss
Which drugs cause cancer? * Cancer bioassays
BMJ, October 15, 2005; 331(7521): E389 - E391.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
D F. Lewis, M G Bird, and M N Jacobs
Human carcinogens: an evaluation study via the COMPACT and HazardExpert procedures
Human and Experimental Toxicology, March 1, 2002; 21(3): 115 - 122.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Toxicol PatholHome page
A. B. Ulrich, J. Standop, B. M. Schmied, M. B. Schneider, T. A. Lawson, and P. M. Pour
Species Differences in the Distribution of Drug-Metabolizing Enzymes in the Pancreas
Toxicol Pathol, February 1, 2002; 30(2): 247 - 253.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
D. F. Lewis, C. Ioannides, and D. V Parke
A combined COMPACT and HazardExpert study of 40 chemicals for which information on mutagenicity and carcinogenicity is known, including the results of human epidemiological studies
Human and Experimental Toxicology, October 1, 1998; 17(10): 577 - 586.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.