Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals for DNA Damage in the Chicken Egg Genotoxicity Assay (CEGA).

DNA damage is an established initiating event in the mutagenicity and carcinogenicity of genotoxic chemicals. Accordingly, assessment of this endpoint is critical for chemicals which are being developed for use in humans. To assess the ability of the Chicken Egg Genotoxicity Assay (CEGA) to detect genotoxic pharmaceuticals, a set of 23 compounds with different pharmacological and reported genotoxic effects was tested for the potential to produce nuclear DNA adducts and strand breaks in the embryo-fetal livers using the 32P-nucleotide postlabeling (NPL) and comet assays, respectively. Due to high toxicity, two aneugens, colchicine and vinblastine, and an autophagy inhibitor, hydroxychloroquine, could not be evaluated. Out of the 20 remaining pharmaceuticals, 10 including estrogen modulators, diethylstilbestrol and tamoxifen, antineoplastics cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and mitomycin C, antifungal griseofulvin, local anesthetics lidocaine and prilocaine, and antihistamines diphenhydramine and doxylamine, yielded clear positive outcomes in at least one of the assays. The antihypertensive vasodilator hydralazine and antineoplastics streptozotocin and teniposide, produced only DNA strand breaks, which were not dose-dependent, and thus, the results with these 3 pharmaceuticals were considered equivocal. No DNA damage was detected for 7 compounds, including the purine antagonist 6-thioguanine, antipyretic analgesics acetaminophen and phenacetin, antibiotic ciprofloxacin, antilipidemic clofibrate, anti-inflammatory ibuprofen, and sedative phenobarbital. However, low solubility of these compounds limited dosages tested in CEGA. Overall, results in CEGA were largely in concordance with the outcomes in other systems in vitro and in vivo, indicating that CEGA provides reliable detection of DNA damaging activity of genotoxic compounds. Further evaluations with a broader set of compounds would support this conclusion.

Assessment of DNA Binding and Oxidative DNA Damage by Acrylonitrile in Two Rat Target Tissues of Carcinogenicity: Implications for the Mechanism of Action.

Exposure to acrylonitrile induces formation of tumors at multiple sites in rats, with females being more sensitive. The present study assessed possible mechanisms of acrylonitrile tumorigenicity, covalent DNA binding, DNA breakage, and oxidative DNA damage, in two target tissues, the brain and Zymbal's glands, of sensitive female Fischer (F344) and Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats. One group received acrylonitrile in drinking water at 100 ppm for 28 days. Two other groups were administered either acrylonitrile in drinking water at 100 ppm or drinking water alone for 27 days, followed by a single oral gavage dose of 11 mg/kg bw 14C-acrylonitrile on day 28. A positive control group received a single dose of 5 mg/kg bw of 7-14C-benzo[a]pyrene, on day 27 following the administration of drinking water for 26 days. Using liquid scintillation counting, no association of radiolabeled acrylonitrile with brain DNA was found. In accelerator mass spectrometry analysis, the association of 14C of acrylonitrile with DNA in brains was detected and was similar in both strains, which may reflect acrylonitrile binding to protein as well as to DNA. Nucleotide 32P-postlabeling assay analysis of brain samples from rats of both strains yielded no evidence of acrylonitrile DNA adducts. Negative conventional comet assay results indicate the absence of direct DNA strand breaks in the brain and Zymbal's gland in both strains of rats dosed with acrylonitrile. In both rat strains, positive results in an enhanced comet assay were found only in brain samples digested with formamidopyrimidine-DNA glycosylase but not with human 8-hydroxyguanine-DNA glycosylase, indicating possible oxidative DNA damage, other than 8-oxodG formation. In conclusion, definitive evidence of DNA binding of acrylonitrile in the brain and Zymbal's gland was not obtained under the test conditions. A role for oxidative stress in tumorigenesis in the brain but not Zymbal's gland may exist.

Glyphosate rodent carcinogenicity bioassay expert panel review.

Glyphosate has been rigorously and extensively tested for carcinogenicity by administration to mice (five studies) and to rats (nine studies). Most authorities have concluded that the evidence does not indicate a cancer risk to humans. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), however, evaluated some of the available data and concluded that glyphosate probably is carcinogenic to humans. The expert panel convened by Intertek assessed the findings used by IARC, as well as the full body of evidence and found the following: (1) the renal neoplastic effects in males of one mouse study are not associated with glyphosate exposure, because they lack statistical significance, strength, consistency, specificity, lack a dose-response pattern, plausibility, and coherence; (2) the strength of association of liver hemangiosarcomas in a different mouse study is absent, lacking consistency, and a dose-response effect and having in high dose males only a significant incidence increase which is within the historical control range; (3) pancreatic islet-cell adenomas (non-significant incidence increase), in two studies of male SD rats did not progress to carcinomas and lacked a dose-response pattern (the highest incidence is in the low dose followed by the high dose); (4) in one of two studies, a non-significant positive trend in the incidence of hepatocellular adenomas in male rats did not lead to progression to carcinomas; (5) in one of two studies, the non-significant positive trend in the incidence of thyroid C-cell adenomas in female rats was not present and there was no progression of adenomas to carcinomas at the end of the study. Application of criteria for causality considerations to the above mentioned tumor types and given the overall weight-of-evidence (WoE), the expert panel concluded that glyphosate is not a carcinogen in laboratory animals.

A review of the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate by four independent expert panels and comparison to the IARC assessment.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a monograph in 2015 concluding that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2A) based on limited evidence in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals. It was also concluded that there was strong evidence of genotoxicity and oxidative stress. Four Expert Panels have been convened for the purpose of conducting a detailed critique of the evidence in light of IARC's assessment and to review all relevant information pertaining to glyphosate exposure, animal carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, and epidemiologic studies. Two of the Panels (animal bioassay and genetic toxicology) also provided a critique of the IARC position with respect to conclusions made in these areas. The incidences of neoplasms in the animal bioassays were found not to be associated with glyphosate exposure on the basis that they lacked statistical strength, were inconsistent across studies, lacked dose-response relationships, were not associated with preneoplasia, and/or were not plausible from a mechanistic perspective. The overall weight of evidence from the genetic toxicology data supports a conclusion that glyphosate (including GBFs and AMPA) does not pose a genotoxic hazard and therefore, should not be considered support for the classification of glyphosate as a genotoxic carcinogen. The assessment of the epidemiological data found that the data do not support a causal relationship between glyphosate exposure and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma while the data were judged to be too sparse to assess a potential relationship between glyphosate exposure and multiple myeloma. As a result, following the review of the totality of the evidence, the Panels concluded that the data do not support IARC's conclusion that glyphosate is a "probable human carcinogen" and, consistent with previous regulatory assessments, further concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.

Sucralose Non-Carcinogenicity: A Review of the Scientific and Regulatory Rationale.

Regulatory authorities worldwide have found the nonnutritive sweetener, sucralose, to be noncarcinogenic, based on a range of studies. A review of these and other studies found through a comprehensive search of electronic databases, using appropriate key terms, was conducted and results of that review are reported here. An overview of the types of studies relied upon by regulatory agencies to assess carcinogenicity potential is also provided as context. Physiochemical and pharmacokinetic/toxicokinetic studies confirm stability under conditions of use and reveal no metabolites of carcinogenic potential. In vitro and in vivo assays reveal no confirmed genotoxic activity. Long-term carcinogenicity studies in animal models provide no evidence of carcinogenic potential for sucralose. In studies in healthy adults, sucralose was well-tolerated and without evidence of toxicity or other changes that might suggest a potential for carcinogenic effects. In summary, sucralose does not demonstrate carcinogenic activity even when exposure levels are several orders of magnitude greater than the range of anticipated daily ingestion levels.

Sex differences in DNA damage produced by the carcinogen 2-acetylaminofluorene in cultured human hepatocytes compared to rat liver and cultured rat hepatocytes.

Male rats are more susceptible to the induction of liver cancer by the aromatic amine 2-acetylaminofluorene (AAF) than are females. To assess the basis for this difference and to determine whether sex differences in susceptibility to AAF are present in human liver cells, the DNA reactivity of AAF was measured in livers of male and female Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats and in cultured SD rat and human hepatocytes of both sexes. In livers of rats administered oral doses of AAF, the total levels of adducts measured by nucleotide postlabelling at up to 8 weeks were about twofold greater in males than in females. Similarly, the level of AAF-DNA adducts formed in cultured male rat hepatocytes dosed with AAF was about twofold greater than in female rat hepatocytes. Also, the level of DNA repair synthesis was about threefold greater in AAF-dosed cultured male rat hepatocytes compared with female, indicating that the greater adduct levels in males was not due to lesser repair. In contrast, in cultured human hepatocytes of both sexes, AAF produced similar levels of adducts and DNA repair synthesis, which were intermediate between those produced in male and female rat hepatocytes. Thus, the greater susceptibility of male rats to AAF hepatocarcinogenicity is due at least in part to greater bioactivation and formation of AAF-DNA adducts in hepatocytes. Moreover, the data from human hepatocytes suggest that human liver could be less susceptible than male rat liver to the carcinogenic effects of aromatic amine carcinogens of the AAF type.

GRAS determination scientific procedures and possible alternatives.

The use of a food substance is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) through scientific procedures or experience based on common use in food. The pivotal data used for GRAS determination must be of common knowledge and should include evidence for safety under the conditions of intended use of the substance. Such evidence includes data on the identity and specifications of the substance, its properties of absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion, and depending on the level of concern, data on genotoxicity, acute and subchronic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity and carcinogenicity. Several alternative procedures can be used as the replacement for standard scientific procedures in order to improve the GRAS process.

An organizational approach for the assessment of DNA adduct data in risk assessment: case studies for aflatoxin B1, tamoxifen and vinyl chloride.

The framework analysis previously presented for using DNA adduct information in the risk assessment of chemical carcinogens was applied in a series of case studies which place the adduct information into context with the key events in carcinogenesis to determine whether they could be used to support a mutagenic mode of action (MOA) for the examined chemicals. Three data-rich chemicals, aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), tamoxifen (Tam) and vinyl chloride (VCl) were selected for this exercise. These chemicals were selected because they are known human carcinogens and have different characteristics: AFB1 forms a unique adduct and human exposure is through contaminated foods; Tam is a pharmaceutical given to women so that the dose and duration of exposure are known, forms unique adducts in rodents, and has both estrogenic and genotoxic properties; and VCl, to which there is industrial exposure, forms a number of adducts that are identical to endogenous adducts found in unexposed people. All three chemicals produce liver tumors in rats. AFB1 and VCl also produce liver tumors in humans, but Tam induces human uterine tumors, only. To support a mutagenic MOA, the chemical-induced adducts must be characterized, shown to be pro-mutagenic, be present in the tumor target tissue, and produce mutations of the class found in the tumor. The adducts formed by AFB1 and VCl support a mutagenic MOA for their carcinogenicity. However, the data available for Tam shows a mutagenic MOA for liver tumors in rats, but its carcinogenicity in humans is most likely via a different MOA.

Lack of genotoxicity potential and safety assessment of 4-(2-hydroxyethyl) morpholine present as an impurity in pharmaceuticals and nutritional supplements.

4-(2-Hydroxyethyl) morpholine (HEM) is widely used as a building block of macromolecules in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements and could remain as an impurity in the finished products. An evaluation of HEM was conducted to identify endpoints that could be used to determine the point-of-departure (POD) for use in assessing the potential risk from exposure to HEM. No oral repeated dose toxicological studies of appropriate duration were found for HEM. Therefore, suitable analogue(s) were identified. Although oral repeated dose studies were available for the analogues, the studies were not of sufficient duration for use in the assignment of a POD for risk evaluation. Accordingly, the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) approach, which proposes that a de minimis value can be derived to qualitatively assess risk, was considered for HEM. To determine the appropriate TTC approach (genotoxic or non-genotoxic), the genotoxicity of HEM and its analogues were evaluated. The weight of the evidence indicated that HEM, and the appropriate analogues, are not genotoxic. Considering the chemical structure of HEM, the non-genotoxic Cramer class III TTC value of 1.5 µg/kg bw/day was determined to be appropriate for use in safety assessment of HEM as an impurity in products intended for human consumption.

Assessment of no-observed-effect-levels for DNA adducts formation by genotoxic carcinogens in fetal turkey livers.

For genotoxic carcinogens, covalent binding to DNA is a critical initiating event in tumorigenesis. The present research investigated dose-effect relationships of three genotoxic carcinogens representing different structural classes, 2-acetylaminofluorene (2-AAF), benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) and quinoline (QUI), to assess the existence of no-observed-effect-levels (NOELs) for the formation of DNA adducts. Carcinogens were administered into the air sac of fertilized turkey eggs over wide dose ranges in three daily injections on days 22 to 24 of incubation. DNA adducts were measured in the fetal turkey livers by the 32P-nucleotide postlabeling (NPL) assay. B[a]P and QUI produced DNA adducts in a dosage-related manner and exhibited NOELs at 0.65 and 0.35 mg/kg bw/day, respectively. In contrast, 2-AAF formed DNA adducts at all tested dosages down to 0.005 mg/kg bw/day. Benchmark dose (BMD) analysis identified the potencies of 2-AAF and QUI to be similar, while B[a]P was the least potent compound. Overall, findings in fetal turkey livers demonstrated that exposure levels to genotoxic compounds that do not result in DNA adducts can exist but are not evident with all carcinogens of this type. The use of mechanistic dose-effect studies for genotoxic endpoints can provide critical information for prioritization of concerns for risk assessment.

Evaluation of the carcinogenicity of gallium arsenide.

Gallium arsenide (GaAs) is an important semiconductor material. In 2-year inhalation studies, GaAs increased the incidence of lung tumors in female rats, but not in male rats or male and female mice. Alveolar proteinosis followed by chronic active inflammation was the predominant non-neoplastic pulmonary findings. IARC classified GaAs as carcinogenic to humans (group 1) based on the assumption that As and Ga ions are bioavailable. The European Chemical Agency Risk Assessment Committee concluded that GaAs should be classified into Carcinogenicity Category 1B (presumed to have carcinogenic potential for humans; ECHA). We evaluate whether these classifications are justified. Physico-chemical properties of GaAs particles and the degree of mechanical treatment are critical in this evaluation. The available data on mode of action (MOA), genotoxicity and bioavailability do not support the contribution of As or Ga ions to the lung tumors in female rats. Most toxicological studies utilized small particles produced by strong mechanical treatment, destroying the crystalline structure. The resulting amorphous GaAs is not relevant to crystalline GaAs at production and processing sites. The likely tumorigenic MOA is lung toxicity related to particulate-induced inflammation and increased proliferation. It is concluded that there is no evidence for a primary carcinogenic effect of GaAs.

Evaluation of the male reproductive toxicity of gallium arsenide.

Gallium arsenide is an important semiconductor material marketed in the shape of wafers and thus is not hazardous to the end user. Exposure to GaAs particles may, however, occur during manufacture and processing. Potential hazards require evaluation. In 14-week inhalation studies with small GaAs particles, testicular effects have been reported in rats and mice. These effects occurred only in animals whose lungs showed marked inflammation and also had hematologic changes indicating anemia and hemolysis. The time- and concentration-dependent progressive nature of the lung and blood effects together with bioavailability data on gallium and arsenic lead us to conclude that the testicular/sperm effects are secondary to hypoxemia resulting from lung damage rather than due to a direct chemical effect of gallium or arsenide. Conditions leading to such primary effects are not expected to occur in humans at production and processing sites. This has to be taken into consideration for any classification decision for reproductive toxicity; especially a category 1 according to the EU CLP system is not warranted.

Food-Borne Chemical Carcinogens and the Evidence for Human Cancer Risk.

Commonly consumed foods and beverages can contain chemicals with reported carcinogenic activity in rodent models. Moreover, exposures to some of these substances have been associated with increased cancer risks in humans. Food-borne carcinogens span a range of chemical classes and can arise from natural or anthropogenic sources, as well as form endogenously. Important considerations include the mechanism(s) of action (MoA), their relevance to human biology, and the level of exposure in diet. The MoAs of carcinogens have been classified as either DNA-reactive (genotoxic), involving covalent reaction with nuclear DNA, or epigenetic, involving molecular and cellular effects other than DNA reactivity. Carcinogens are generally present in food at low levels, resulting in low daily intakes, although there are some exceptions. Carcinogens of the DNA-reactive type produce effects at lower dosages than epigenetic carcinogens. Several food-related DNA-reactive carcinogens, including aflatoxins, aristolochic acid, benzene, benzo[a]pyrene and ethylene oxide, are recognized by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as causes of human cancer. Of the epigenetic type, the only carcinogen considered to be associated with increased cancer in humans, although not from low-level food exposure, is dioxin (TCDD). Thus, DNA-reactive carcinogens in food represent a much greater risk than epigenetic carcinogens.

A proposed framework for assessing risk from less-than-lifetime exposures to carcinogens.

Quantitative methods for estimation of cancer risk have been developed for daily, lifetime human exposures. There are a variety of studies or methodologies available to address less-than-lifetime exposures. However, a common framework for evaluating risk from less-than-lifetime exposures (including short-term and/or intermittent exposures) does not exist, which could result in inconsistencies in risk assessment practice. To address this risk assessment need, a committee of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute conducted a multisector workshop in late 2009 to discuss available literature, different methodologies, and a proposed framework. The proposed framework provides a decision tree and guidance for cancer risk assessments for less-than-lifetime exposures based on current knowledge of mode of action and dose-response. Available data from rodent studies and epidemiological studies involving less-than-lifetime exposures are considered, in addition to statistical approaches described in the literature for evaluating the impact of changing the dose rate and exposure duration for exposure to carcinogens. The decision tree also provides for scenarios in which an assumption of potential carcinogenicity is appropriate (e.g., based on structural alerts or genotoxicity data), but bioassay or other data are lacking from which a chemical-specific cancer potency can be determined. This paper presents an overview of the rationale for the workshop, reviews historical background, describes the proposed framework for assessing less-than-lifetime exposures to potential human carcinogens, and suggests next steps.

Production of liver preneoplasia and gallbladder agenesis in turkey fetuses administered diethylnitrosamine.

The in ovo carcinogenicity assessing (IOCA) assay was used to examine the morphological changes in fetal turkey livers caused by the DNA-reactive carcinogen diethylnitrosamine (DEN). Fertilized turkey eggs were allocated into 3 groups: nondosed control (NDC), vehicle (water) control (VC) and DEN-dosed. At day 0, the fertilized eggs of the dosed groups were injected with 1 (LD) or 4 (HD) mg/egg (about 12.5 or 50 mg/kg egg) of DEN and the VC were injected with water. All eggs were allowed to incubate at 37°C and 60% humidity for 24 days. The fetal livers were collected and processed for histopathological evaluation (H&E staining). Typical survival rates were 82% for the NDC, 50% for the VC and 16-65% for the DEN-dosed fetuses. No difference in histology was found between NDC and VC control groups. Both DEN concentrations produced dose-related liver findings consisting of foci of altered hepatocytes (FAH), which had assumed a tubular cord (glandular) pattern, and in HD DEN group the FAH assumed a tumor-like morphology. In addition, the high DEN dose produced gallbladder agenesis. Thus, DEN produced both hepatocellular transformation (FAH) similar to preneoplastic microscopic changes in adult rodents, reflecting disruption of the fetal processes of differentiation and proliferation, and also teratogenicity (gallbladder agenesis).

Creating context for the use of DNA adduct data in cancer risk assessment: I. Data organization.

The assessment of human cancer risk from chemical exposure requires the integration of diverse types of data. Such data involve effects at the cell and tissue levels. This report focuses on the specific utility of one type of data, namely DNA adducts. Emphasis is placed on the appreciation that such DNA adduct data cannot be used in isolation in the risk assessment process but must be used in an integrated fashion with other information. As emerging technologies provide even more sensitive quantitative measurements of DNA adducts, integration that establishes links between DNA adducts and accepted outcome measures becomes critical for risk assessment. The present report proposes an organizational approach for the assessment of DNA adduct data (e.g., type of adduct, frequency, persistence, type of repair process) in concert with other relevant data, such as dosimetry, toxicity, mutagenicity, genotoxicity, and tumor incidence, to inform characterization of the mode of action. DNA adducts are considered biomarkers of exposure, whereas gene mutations and chromosomal alterations are often biomarkers of early biological effects and also can be bioindicators of the carcinogenic process.

ECETOC workshop on the biological significance of DNA adducts: summary of follow-up from an expert panel meeting.

This workshop on the biological significance of DNA adducts included presentations of research results in the following areas: endogenous versus exogenous adduct levels; in vitro dose-response data on adducts and mutagenesis from alkylating agents; methyltransferases and alkyl transferase-like proteins in repair of O(6)-alkylguanine adducts; mathematical modeling of threshold dose-response in mutagenesis and carcinogenesis; and the use of genomics to characterize the relationships between adducts, gene expression, and downstream adverse effects. Presentations by regulatory scientists and other authorities addressed the role of adduct and mutation data in risk characterization. Consensus statements were developed and included the following: DNA adducts should be considered as biomarkers of exposure, which may play a key role in establishing a mode of action (MOA) for cancer. Adducts themselves should not be considered as equivalent to mutations or later stage events in carcinogenesis. Although it was not possible at this time to agree on a general level of adducts below which there is no adverse biological effect, there are examples of genotoxic mutagens/carcinogens for which thresholds have been demonstrated. Evidence regarding thresholds for mutations should be considered on a case-by-case basis, in light of available MOA and mechanistic data, to build a knowledge base. Participants agreed that guidance on a recommended format for data presentation (especially agreement on units and appropriate statistical analyses) would be beneficial. Finally, for initial cases, provision of a mechanistic explanation to support a hypothesis of a threshold for mutations was essential for the eventual use of this information in risk assessment.

Evaluation of potential human carcinogenicity of the synthetic monomer ethyl acrylate.

Ethyl acrylate (EA) is an acrylic monomer used in the manufacture of a variety of polymers and copolymers as components of many commercially important products. Human exposure to EA occurs primarily in the workplace via inhalation or dermal contact. In F344 rat and B6C3F(1) mouse studies of EA carcinogenicity conducted by the National Toxicology Program [National Toxicology Program, NTP, 1986. Carcinogenesis Studies of Ethyl Acrylate (CAS No. 140-88-5) in F344/N Rats and B6C3F(1) Mice (Gavage Studies) (Tech. Rep. Ser. No. 259; NIH Publication No. 87-2515), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA], the only increased tumor incidences was in squamous cell papillomas and carcinomas of the forestomach, when EA was administered by gavage in corn oil at 100 or 200mg/kg/day (high dose; HD). The neoplasms were preceded by forestomach irritation, inflammation, hyperkeratosis and hyperplasia of the forestomach mucosa. In studies in which rats and mice were exposed at comparable doses to EA in drinking water, by inhalation, or by dermal application, no neoplasms in the forestomach or in any other tissue were reported. EA exhibited clastogenicity and related mutagenicity in vitro, but was non-genotoxic in vivo, including in the forestomach of treated rats. The in vitro clastogenicity response correlates well with cellular toxicity, mediated by non-protein sulfhydryl depletion and mitochondrial impairment. Thus, the carcinogenicity in the forestomach can be ascribed to a non-genotoxic mode of action (MOA). The forestomach mucosal hyperplastic and even dysplastic changes, observed chronically, were reversible, provided the HD exposure was not longer than 6months. This again supports a non-genotoxic MOA. In addition, the route and rate of EA exposure in rodents for forestomach neoplasia are irrelevant to potential human exposure, since humans do not have forestomach and are not exposed to EA by oral bolus. Thus, the weight of evidence indicates that the tumors produced in the rodent carcinogenicity studies arise from conditions that are irrelevant for human risk assessment.

Review of the evidence for thresholds for DNA-Reactive and epigenetic experimental chemical carcinogens.

In the deliberations over many years on the question of thresholds for the carcinogenicity of chemicals, the dominant paradigm has been the linear no-threshold (LNT) model, derived from concepts formulated in radiation mutagenicity. Based on the analogy with radiation, the key mechanistic assumption underlying the assessment of the dose-effect of chemical-induced carcinogenicity has been that any dose, no matter how low, can lead to induction of mutations, which will result in some risk of neoplasia. The LNT assumption, however, was never well founded and, its application to chemical carcinogens, does not allow for differences in their disposition or mechanisms of action. These mechanisms include DNA-reactivity and epigenetic effects, resulting from very different properties of carcinogens, leading to different dose effects. This review of the research on dose effects of chemical carcinogens administered by repeat dosing for long duration reveals that only some experiments involving what are now recognized as DNA-reactive carcinogens yielded dose effects for induction of tumors which were consistent with the absence of a threshold (for 6/14 chemicals). None of these studies, however, included low doses documented not to produce genetic or other cellular toxicities that underlie carcinogenicity. Otherwise, most dose-effect experiments, including all with epigenetic agents (7), revealed no-observed-effect-levels for tumors, indicative of subthreshold doses. Based on highly informative experimental data, including relevant mechanistic data, it is concluded that no-effect-levels exist for both carcinogen-induced precursor effects and neoplasia. Accordingly, we conclude that, at non-toxic dosages, thresholds exist for the induction of experimental cancer by all types of carcinogens.

Mechanisms of DNA-reactive and epigenetic chemical carcinogens: applications to carcinogenicity testing and risk assessment.

Chemicals with carcinogenic activity in either animals or humans produce increases in neoplasia through diverse mechanisms. One mechanism is reaction with nuclear DNA. Other mechanisms consist of epigenetic effects involving either modifications of regulatory macromolecules or perturbation of cellular regulatory processes. The basis for distinguishing between carcinogens that have either DNA reactivity or an epigenetic activity as their primary mechanism of action is detailed in this review. In addition, important applications of information on these mechanisms of action to carcinogenicity testing and human risk assessment are discussed.