Hazard identification, classification, and risk assessment of carcinogens: too much or too little? – Report of an ECETOC workshop. (2nd January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Felter, Susan P.; Boobis, Alan R.; Botham, Philip A.; Brousse, Alice; Greim, Helmut; Hollnagel, Heli M.; Sauer, Ursula G.
• Is Part Of: Critical reviews in toxicology. Volume 50:Number 1(2020)
• Page Start: 72
• Page End: 95
• Publication Date: 2020-01-02
• Subjects: Non-genotoxic carcinogens -- mode of action (MoA) -- classification and labeling (C&L) -- new approach methodologies (NAMs) -- tiered testing strategy -- weight of evidence (WoE); Toxicology -- Periodicals; Poisons -- Physiological effect -- Periodicals; Toxicology -- Periodicals; 615.9
• DOI: 10.1080/10408444.2020.1727843
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1040-8444

Abstract

Abstract: The European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) organized a workshop " Hazard Identification, Classification and Risk Assessment of Carcinogens: Too Much or Too Little? " to explore the scientific limitations of the current binary carcinogenicity classification scheme that classifies substances as either carcinogenic or not. Classification is often based upon the rodent 2-year bioassay, which has scientific limitations and is not necessary to predict whether substances are likely human carcinogens. By contrast, tiered testing strategies founded on new approach methodologies (NAMs) followed by subchronic toxicity testing, as necessary, are useful to determine if a substance is likely carcinogenic, by which mode-of-action effects would occur and, for non-genotoxic carcinogens, the dose levels below which the key events leading to carcinogenicity are not affected. Importantly, the objective is not for NAMs to mimic high-dose effects recorded in vivo, as these are not relevant to human risk assessment. Carcinogenicity testing at the "maximum tolerated dose" does not reflect human exposure conditions, but causes major disturbances of homeostasis, which are very unlikely to occur at relevant human exposure levels. The evaluation of findings should consider biological relevance and not just statistical significance. Using this approach, safe exposures to non-genotoxic substances can be established.