Comparative biology of test species
- PMID: 3289908
- PMCID: PMC1474542
- DOI: 10.1289/ehp.887755
Comparative biology of test species
Abstract
This paper assesses the capacity of animal models to predict human response to carcinogenic agents with consideration for the heterogeneity of humans. It is widely accepted that human susceptibility to toxic substances, including carcinogens, is highly variable. Conventional rodent models are usually highly inbred and valued for their ability to display characteristic homogeneity. Current practice assumes that the homogeneity of response to toxic agents, including carcinogens, in the rodent model will be representative of humans. The issue then becomes, To which of the broad spectrum of human responses are specific animal models likely to be related? This paper examines the extent of human heterogeneity over a broad range of biochemical characteristics (e.g., aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase activity, epoxide hydrase activity, beta-glucuronidase activity, debrisoquine hydroxylation, DNA-adduct formation) with emphasis on those biochemical characteristics that affect responses to carcinogens. Examples are presented to compare the heterogeneity of selected animal models for these biochemical characteristics as they relate to the spectrum of human responses noted above. The paper presents a theoretical perspective for determining to which part of the human population response spectrum common animal models are most likely to be extrapolated.
Similar articles
-
Animal extrapolation and the challenge of human heterogeneity.J Pharm Sci. 1986 Nov;75(11):1041-6. doi: 10.1002/jps.2600751105. J Pharm Sci. 1986. PMID: 3820097
-
Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity.Mutat Res. 2005 Jul 4;584(1-2):1-256. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2005.02.004. Mutat Res. 2005. PMID: 15979392
-
Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens II. Further analysis of mammalian cell results, relative predictivity and tumour profiles.Mutat Res. 2006 Sep 19;608(1):29-42. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2006.04.017. Mutat Res. 2006. PMID: 16769241
-
[Genotoxicity of carcinogenic substances in humans and animals].J Toxicol Clin Exp. 1989;9(2 Pt 2):15-25. J Toxicol Clin Exp. 1989. PMID: 2677321 Review. French.
-
Mode-of-action framework for evaluating the relevance of rodent forestomach tumors in cancer risk assessment.Toxicol Sci. 2007 Aug;98(2):313-26. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfm075. Epub 2007 Apr 10. Toxicol Sci. 2007. PMID: 17426108 Review.
Cited by
-
Effects of four Indian medicinal herbs on Isoniazid-, Rifampicin- and Pyrazinamide-induced hepatic injury and immunosuppression in guinea pigs.World J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jun 21;13(23):3199-205. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i23.3199. World J Gastroenterol. 2007. PMID: 17589898 Free PMC article.
-
Predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals in humans from rodent bioassay data.Environ Health Perspect. 1991 Aug;94:195-218. doi: 10.1289/ehp.94-1567942. Environ Health Perspect. 1991. PMID: 1954931 Free PMC article. Review.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources