Benchmark dose calculation for ordered categorical responses.

The use of benchmark dose (BMD) calculations for dichotomous or continuous responses is well established in the risk assessment of cancer and noncancer endpoints. In some cases, responses to exposure are categorized in terms of ordinal severity effects such as none, mild, adverse, and severe. Such responses can be assessed using categorical regression (CATREG) analysis. However, while CATREG has been employed to compare the benchmark approach and the no-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) approach in determining a reference dose, the utility of CATREG for risk assessment remains unclear. This study proposes a CATREG model to extend the BMD approach to ordered categorical responses by modeling severity levels as censored interval limits of a standard normal distribution. The BMD is calculated as a weighted average of the BMDs obtained at dichotomous cutoffs for each adverse severity level above the critical effect, with the weights being proportional to the reciprocal of the expected loss at the cutoff under the normal probability model. This approach provides a link between the current BMD procedures for dichotomous and continuous data. We estimate the CATREG parameters using a Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation procedure. The proposed method is demonstrated using examples of aldicarb and urethane, each with several categories of severity levels. Simulation studies comparing the BMD and BMDL (lower confidence bound on the BMD) using the proposed method to the correspondent estimates using the existing methods for dichotomous and continuous data are quite compatible; the difference is mainly dependent on the choice of cutoffs for the severity levels.

Is urethane-chloralose anaesthesia appropriate for pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic assessment? Studies with carvedilol.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the work was to establish the impact of urethane-chloralose anaesthesia on pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) properties of carvedilol in control rats and L-NAME hypertensive animals. METHODS: Male Wistar Rats were randomly divided into: control (n=12) with tap water to drink and L-NAME rats (n=12) with L-NAME solution (40 mg/kg/day) to drink for 2 weeks. Effects of carvedilol (1 mg kg(-1), i.v.) on blood pressure and heart rate were recorded during 3 h in conscious and urethane (500 mg kg(-1), i.p.) - chloralose (50 mg kg(-1), i.p.) anaesthetized rats. Carvedilol plasma pharmacokinetics was studied by means of traditional blood sampling. PK-PD modeling of carvedilol was made by means of an effect compartment model. RESULTS: Neither urethane-chloralose nor L-NAME modified estimation of pharmacokinetic parameters of carvedilol. Although urethane-chloralose did not modify potency of carvedilol comparing with awake animals in control and hypertensive group, maximal negative chronotropic response was significantly greater in anaesthetized L-NAME rats in comparison to awake animals. Conversely, anaesthesia did not modify maximal chronotropic response to carvedilol in control rats. Whilst no differences were found in the estimated potency of carvedilol hypotensive response comparing control and L-NAME rats in both awake and anaesthetized conditions, maximal hypotensive effect of carvedilol was significantly greater in anaesthetized control and L-NAME animals in comparison to conscious rats. L-NAME rats showed a greater maximal hypotensive response comparing to control group. DISCUSSION: Urethane-chloralose anaesthesia is an acceptable experimental condition for the evaluation of PK-PD properties of carvedilol, considering that it does not affect the potency of carvedilol for its chronotropic and hypotensive effect. Conclusions obtained from urethane-chloralose anaesthetized animals, regarding the impact of l-NAME treatment on PK-PD properties of carvedilol, did not differ from those obtained from conscious animals. Anaesthesia did not modify pharmacokinetic behaviour of carvedilol in both normotensive and L-NAME hypertensive rats.

Quantitative risk assessment of carcinogenicity of urethane (ethyl carbamate) on the basis of long-term oral administration to B6C3F1 mice.

A carcinogenicity study of urethane was performed for quantitative assessment of its risk in humans. Three hundred 6-week-old male B6C3F1 mice were divided into 6 groups, each consisting of 50 mice, and urethane was given ad libitum in drinking water at levels of 0 (control), 0.6, 3, 6, 60 and 600 ppm for 70 weeks. The tumors with a clear dose-response relationship were lung tumor (alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma or carcinoma) and liver tumor (hemangioma or angiosarcoma). The incidences of these two types of tumor were applied to estimation of the virtually safe dose (VSD) at the level of 10(-6) by using four mathematical models (Logit, Probit, Weibull and Multistage models). The VSD based on the incidences of lung tumor by using the Logit model was estimated to be 1.8 x 10(-4) mg/kg body weight/day. On the other hand the VSD based on those of liver tumor by using the Weibull model was 7.2 x 10(-5) mg/kg body weight/day. Thus, the VSDs based on the incidences of the two different types of tumor using the most compatible mathematical model in each case, as judged from the P-values, were similar.