RESUMEN
MOTIVATION: The evaluation of chemicals for their carcinogenic hazard requires the analysis of a wide range of data and the characterization of these results relative to the key characteristics of carcinogens. The workflow used historically requires many manual steps that are labor-intensive and can introduce errors, bias and inconsistencies. RESULTS: The automation of parts of the evaluation workflow using the kc-hits software has led to significant improvements in process efficiency, as well as more consistent and comprehensive results. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://gitlab.com/i1650/kc-hits.git. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Asunto(s)
Carcinógenos , Programas Informáticos , Automatización , Carcinógenos/toxicidad , Flujo de TrabajoAsunto(s)
Cobalto , Tungsteno , Aleaciones/toxicidad , Antimonio/toxicidad , Cobalto/toxicidad , Humanos , Tungsteno/toxicidadAsunto(s)
Benceno/toxicidad , Carcinogénesis/inducido químicamente , Carcinógenos Ambientales/toxicidad , Neoplasias Hematológicas/inducido químicamente , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/inducido químicamente , Animales , Benceno/administración & dosificación , Pruebas de Carcinogenicidad , Consenso , Modelos Animales de Enfermedad , Femenino , Francia , Neoplasias Hematológicas/epidemiología , Neoplasias Hematológicas/fisiopatología , Humanos , Incidencia , Internacionalidad , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/fisiopatología , Masculino , Exposición Profesional/efectos adversos , Distribución Aleatoria , Ratas , Medición de Riesgo , Tasa de SupervivenciaAsunto(s)
Carcinógenos Ambientales/efectos adversos , Molibdeno/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/inducido químicamente , Exposición Profesional/efectos adversos , Salud Laboral , Óxidos/efectos adversos , Compuestos de Estaño/efectos adversos , Soldadura , Animales , Carcinógenos Ambientales/clasificación , Humanos , Molibdeno/clasificación , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Óxidos/clasificación , Medición de Riesgo , Compuestos de Estaño/clasificaciónAsunto(s)
Caprilatos/efectos adversos , Carcinogénesis/inducido químicamente , Fluorocarburos/efectos adversos , Cloruro de Metileno/efectos adversos , Propano/análogos & derivados , Tiofenos/efectos adversos , Caprilatos/química , Carcinógenos/toxicidad , Educación , Fluorocarburos/química , Humanos , Cooperación Internacional , Cloruro de Metileno/química , Exposición Profesional/efectos adversos , Salud Laboral , Propano/efectos adversos , Propano/química , Medición de Riesgo , Tiofenos/químicaAsunto(s)
Asbestos Anfíboles/efectos adversos , Compuestos Inorgánicos de Carbono/efectos adversos , Transformación Celular Neoplásica/inducido químicamente , Nanotubos de Carbono/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/inducido químicamente , Compuestos de Silicona/efectos adversos , Materiales Biocompatibles/efectos adversos , Transformación Celular Neoplásica/patología , Humanos , Neoplasias/patologíaRESUMEN
The Monographs produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) apply rigorous procedures for the scientific review and evaluation of carcinogenic hazards by independent experts. The Preamble to the IARC Monographs, which outlines these procedures, was updated in 2019, following recommendations of a 2018 expert advisory group. This article presents the key features of the updated Preamble, a major milestone that will enable IARC to take advantage of recent scientific and procedural advances made during the 12 years since the last Preamble amendments. The updated Preamble formalizes important developments already being pioneered in the Monographs program. These developments were taken forward in a clarified and strengthened process for identifying, reviewing, evaluating, and integrating evidence to identify causes of human cancer. The advancements adopted include the strengthening of systematic review methodologies; greater emphasis on mechanistic evidence, based on key characteristics of carcinogens; greater consideration of quality and informativeness in the critical evaluation of epidemiological studies, including their exposure assessment methods; improved harmonization of evaluation criteria for the different evidence streams; and a single-step process of integrating evidence on cancer in humans, cancer in experimental animals, and mechanisms for reaching overall evaluations. In all, the updated Preamble underpins a stronger and more transparent method for the identification of carcinogenic hazards, the essential first step in cancer prevention.
Asunto(s)
Carcinógenos/antagonistas & inhibidores , Neoplasias/prevención & control , Animales , Humanos , Agencias Internacionales/organización & administración , Motivación , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Vigilancia en Salud PúblicaAsunto(s)
Contaminantes Atmosféricos/toxicidad , Contaminación del Aire/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/etiología , Contaminantes Atmosféricos/análisis , Contaminación del Aire/análisis , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/efectos adversos , Humanos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/genética , Material Particulado/análisis , Material Particulado/toxicidad , Factores de Riesgo , Emisiones de Vehículos/análisis , Emisiones de Vehículos/toxicidadRESUMEN
Consideration of mechanistic data has the potential to improve the analysis of both epidemiologic studies and cancer bioassays. IARC has a classification system in which mechanistic data can play a pivotal role. Since 1991, IARC has allowed an agent to be classified as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1) when there is less than sufficient evidence in humans but there is sufficient evidence in experimental animals and "strong evidence in exposed humans that the agent acts through a relevant mechanism of carcinogenicity." Mechanistic evidence can also substitute for conventional cancer bioassays when there is less than sufficient evidence in experimental animals, just as mechanistic evidence can substitute for conventional epidemiologic studies when there is less than sufficient evidence in humans. The IARC Monographs have used mechanistic data to raise or lower a classification that would be otherwise based on epidemiologic studies and cancer bioassays only. Recently, the IARC Monographs have evaluated several agents where mechanistic data were pivotal to the overall evaluation: benzo[a]pyrene, carbon black and other poorly soluble particles, ingested nitrates and nitrites, and microcystin-LR. In evaluating mechanistic data, it is important to consider alternative mechanistic hypotheses, because an agent may induce tumors through multiple mechanisms.