Low-dose extrapolation of cancer risks
Read Online

Low-dose extrapolation of cancer risks issues and perspectives

  • 2 Want to read
  • ·
  • 31 Currently reading

Published by ILSI Press in Washington, DC .
Written in


  • Carcinogenesis -- Mathematical models.,
  • Cancer -- Environmental aspects.,
  • Cancer -- Risk assessment.,
  • Carcinogens -- Dose-response relationship.

Book details:

Edition Notes

Includes bibliographical references and index.

Statementedited by Stephen Olin ... [et al.].
ContributionsOlin, Stephen S.
LC ClassificationsRC268.5 .L68 1995
The Physical Object
Paginationxiv, 355 p. :
Number of Pages355
ID Numbers
Open LibraryOL822901M
ISBN 100944398332
LC Control Number95077850

Download Low-dose extrapolation of cancer risks


Draft report: Low-dose Extrapolation of Radiation-Related Cancer Risk. The consultation period is now over. In order to view comments received during the consultation period, please look comment also includes a link to the original draft document that we consulted on. It then describes more recent developments regarding the use of the mode-of-action concept for the selection of a low-dose extrapolation approach, for harmonization of cancer and noncancer risk.   That report proposed three options for extrapolating low-dose risks of both carcinogens and noncarcinogens (conceptual models 1, 2, and 3). Model 1 proposes thresholds for some individuals, but not on a population basis. Model 2 proposes both individual and population by: @article{osti_, title = {Dioxin equivalency: Challenge to dose extrapolation}, author = {Brown, Jr, J F and Silkworth, J B}, abstractNote = {Extensive research has shown that all biological effects of dioxin-like agents are mediated via a single biochemical target, the Ah receptor (AhR), and that the relative biologic potencies of such agents in any given system, coupled with their.

Committee 1 Task Group Report Low-dose Extrapolation of Radiation-Related Cancer Risk Task Group Members CE Land, PA Jeggo, AM Kellerer, JB Little, DA Pierce and RL Ullrich Corresponding Members V Beral, ES Gilbert, K Mabuchi, WK Sinclair, Z Tao Draft of Decem File Size: 1MB. Controversy on toxicological dose-response relationships and low-dose extrapolation of respective risks is often the consequence of misleading data presentation, lack of differentiation between types of response variables, and diverging mechanistic interpretation. In this chapter, we address respective issues and illustrate them with appropriate examples taken from genotoxicity, mutagenicity. A second, slightly more complex approach to estimating low-dose cancer risks while also accounting for endogenous DNA damage could involve computing slope factors from measured endogenous exposure levels combined with information on background cancer risks. That is, if one assumes that some portion of cancers in individuals not exposed to chemicals exogenously are attributable to endogenous. When the 0–4 Gy dose range is used, the low-dose extrapolation factor for all solid tumours, assessing the degree to which low-dose cancer risks are overestimated by fitting a model linear in.

  Purchase Effects of Low Dose and Low Dose Rate Radiation - 1st Edition. Print Book & E-Book. ISBN , Book Edition: 1. In the first part of this chapter, the committee reviews principles of toxicological risk assessment, including interspecies extrapolation, forms of toxicity, mathematical models for assessing cancer risk, low-dose linearity, and multiple exposures. (EFSA ). Given the importance of maximizing the understanding and credibility of the health risks associated with arsenic and moving protection of public health beyond debates over the shape of the dose–response curve below the range of observation of positive findings for selected cancer end points, the committee believes that a critical review of the existing data and a focusing of.   Introduction. Cancer is a burden on humanity and among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with ~14 million new cases and million cancer-related deaths in ().In general, both genetic and environmental factors play a role in an individual’s cancer susceptibility (2,3), so there has been a long-standing emphasis on avoidable ‘lifestyle’ factors (i.e. those Cited by: