Alternatives to the carcinogenicity bioassay: in silico methods, and the in vitro and in vivo mutagenicity assays

Bibliography

• Huff J. Value, validity, and historical development of carcinogenesis studies for predicting and confirming carcinogenic risks to humans. In: Kitchin KT, editor, Carcinogenicity. Testing, predicting, and interpreting chemical effects. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York; 1999. p. 21-123
   Google Scholar
• Huff J. Long-term chemical carcinogenesis bioassays predict human cancer hazards. Issues, controversies, and uncertainties. Ann NY Acad Sci 1999;895:56-79
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller JA, Miller EC. Ultimate chemical carcinogens as reactive mutagenic electrophiles. In: Hiatt HH, Watson JD, Winsten JA, editors, Origins of human cancer. Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 1977. p. 605-28
   Google Scholar
• Miller EC, Miller JA. Searches for ultimate chemical carcinogens and their reactions with cellular macromolecules. Cancer 1981;47:2327-45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcos JC, Argus MF. Multifactor interaction network of carcinogenesis - a “Tour Guide”. In: Arcos JC, Argus MF, Woo YT, editors, Chemical induction of cancer. Modulation and combination effects. Birkhauser, Boston; 1995. p. 1-20
   Google Scholar
• Woo YT. Mechanisms of action of chemical carcinogens, and their role in Structure-Activity Relationships (SAR) analysis and risk assessment. In: Benigni R, editor, Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models of mutagens and carcinogens. CRC Press, Boca Raton; 2003. p. 41-80
   Google Scholar
• Ames BN. The detection of environmental mutagens and potential carcinogens. Cancer 1984;53:2030-40
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maron DM, Ames BN. Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat Res 1983;113:173-215
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiger E. Carcinogenicity of mutagens: predictive capability of the Salmonella mutagenesis assay for rodent carcinogenicity. Cancer Res 1987;47:1287-96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C. Structure Alerts for carcinogenicity, and the Salmonella assay system: a novel insight through the chemical relational databases technology. Mutat Res Revs 2008;659:248-61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashby J, Tennant RW. Chemical structure, Salmonella mutagenicity and extent of carcinogenicity as indicators of genotoxic carcinogenesis among 222 chemicals tested by the U.S.NCI/NTP. Mutat Res 1988;204:17-115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiger E, Haseman JK, Shelby MD, Evaluation of four in vitro genetic toxicity tests for predicting rodent carcinogenicity: confirmation of earlier results with 41 additional chemicals. Environ Mol Mutagen 1990;16:1-14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetterman BA, Soo Kim B, Margolin BH, Predicting rodent carcinogenicity from mutagenic potency measured in the Ames salmonella assay. Environ Mol Mutagen 1997;29:312-22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiger E. History and rationale of genetic toxicity testing: an impersonal, and sometimes personal, view. Environ Health Perspect 2004;44:363-71
   Google Scholar
• Ashby J, Waters MD, Preston J, IPCS harmonization of methods for the prediction and quantification of human carcinogenic/mutagenic hazard, and for indicating the probable mechanism of action of carcinogens. Mutat Res Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen 1996;352:153-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Combes R, Grindon C, Cronin MTD, Proposed integrated decision-tree testing strategies for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity in relation to the EU REACH legislation. ATLA 2007;35:267-87
   Google Scholar
• Kirkland D, Speit G. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens III. Appropriate follow-up testing in vivo. Mutat Res 2008;654:114-32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilienblum W, Dekant W, Foth H, Alternative methods to safety studies in experimental animals: role in the risk assessment of chemicals under the new European Chemicals Legislation (REACH). Arch Toxicol 2008;82:211-36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R. Relationships between in vitro mutagenicity assays. Mutag 1992;7:335-41
   Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Giuliani A. Quantitative modeling and biology: the multivariate approach. Am J Physiol 1994;266:R1697-704
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiger E. Identification of rodent carcinogens and noncarcinogens using genetic toxicity tests: premises, promises, and performance. Regul Pharmacol Toxicol 1998;28:85-95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiger E. Mutagens that are not carcinogens: faulty theory or faulty tests? Mutat Res 2001;492:29-38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Richard AM, Yang C. A novel approach: chemical relational databases, and the role of the ISSCAN database on assessing chemical carcinogenicity. Ann Ist Super Sanità 2008;44:48-56
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennant RW, Margolin BH, Shelby MD, Prediction of chemical carcinogenicity in rodents from in vitro genetic toxicity assays. Science 1987;236:933-41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Worth AP. Structural analysis and predictive value of the rodent in vivo micronucleus assay. Mutagenesis 2010. [Epub ahead of print]
   Google Scholar
• EFSA. Existing approaches incorporating replacement, reduction and refinement of animal testing: applicability in food and feed risk assessment. EFSA J 2009;1052:1-57
   Google Scholar
• Dix DJ, Houck KA, Martin MT, The ToxCast program for prioritizing toxicity testing of environmental chemicals. Toxicol Sci 2007;95:5-12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt C. Testing for carcinogens: shift from animals to automation gathers steam–slowly. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:910-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavlock R, Austin CP, Tice RR. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: implications for human health risk assessment. Risk Anal 2009;29:485-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young D. Drug innovation on the decline. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009;64:228-31
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald JS, Robertson RT. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a view from the pharmaceutical industry. Toxicol Sci 2009;110:40-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashby J. Fundamental structural alerts to potential carcinogenicity or noncarcinogenicity. Environ Mutagen 1985;7:919-21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Woo YT, Lai DY, McLain JL, Use of mechanism-based structure-activity relationships analysis in carcinogenic potential ranking for drinking water disinfection by-products. Environ Health Perspect 2002;110:75-87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansch C, Leo A. Exploring QSAR. 1. Fundamentals and applications in chemistry and biology. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.; 1995
   Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Jeliazkova NG, The Benigni/Bossa rulebase for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity–a module of Toxtree. EUR 23241 EN. Luxenbourg, Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. EUR–Scientific and Technical Report Series. 2008
   Google Scholar
• Woo YT, Lai DY, Argus MF, Arcos JC. Development of structure-activity relationship rules for predicting carcinogenic potential of chemicals. Toxicol Lett 1995;79:219-28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worth AP, Bassan A, de Brujin J, The role of the European chemicals bureau in promoting the regulatory use of (Q)SAR methods. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2007;18:111-25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piegorsch WW, Zeiger E. Measuring intra-assay agreement for the Ames Salmonella assay. In: Rienhoff O, Lindberg DAB, editors, Statistical methods in toxicology. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg; 1991. p. 35-41
   Google Scholar
• Franke R, Gruska A. General introduction to QSAR. In: Benigni R, editor, Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationhsip (QSAR) models of mutagens and carcinogens. CRC Press, Boca Raton; 2003. p. 1-40
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson L, Jaworska JS, Worth AP, Methods for reliability and uncertainty assessment and for applicability evaluations of classification- and regression-based QSARs. Environ Health Perspect 2003;111:1361-75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C. Predictivity of QSAR. J Chem Inf Model 2008;48:971-80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubinyi H. Validation and predictivity of QSAR models. In: Aki-Sener E, Yalcin I, editors, QSAR and Molecular Modelling in rational design of bioactive molecules. The 15th European Symposium on Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships and molecular modelling. CADDS, Ankara; 2005. p. 30-3
   Google Scholar
• Hansch C. Structure-activity relationships of chemical mutagens and carcinogens. Sci Total Environ 1991;109/110:17-29
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin MTD, Dearden JC. QSAR in toxicology. 3. Prediction of chronic toxicities. Quant Struct Act Relat 1995;14:329-34
   Google Scholar
• Debnath AK, Debnath G, Shusterman AJ, Hansch C. A QSAR investigation of the role of hydrophobicity in regulating mutagenicity in the Ames test: 1. Mutagenicity of aromatic and heteroaromatic amines in Salmonella typhimurium TA98 and TA100. Environ Mol Mutagen 1992;19:37-52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debnath AK, Shusterman A, Lopez de Compadre RL, Hansch C. The importance of the hydrophobic interaction in the mutagenicity of organic compounds. Mutat Res 1994;305:63-72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith CJ, Hansch C, Morton MJ. QSAR treatment of multiple toxicities: the mutagenicity and cytotoxicity of quinolines. Mutat Res 1997;379:167-75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez de Compadre RL, Debnath AK, Shusterman AJ, Hansch C. LUMO Energies and hidrophobicity as determinants of mutagenicity by nitroaromatic compounds in Salmonella typhimurium. Environ Mol Mutagen 1990;15:44-55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Netzeva TI, Mechanistic QSAR of aromatic amines: new models for discriminating between homocyclic mutagens and nonmutagens, and validation of models for carcinogens. Environ Mol Mutagen 2007;48:754-71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansch C, Kurup A, Garg R, Gao H. Chem-bioinformatics and QSAR: a review of QSAR lacking positive hydrophobic terms. Chem Revs 2001;101:619-72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Sannes K, Shusterman AJ, Hansch C. The structure-activity relationships of skin carcinogenicity of aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocycles. Chem Biol Interact 1992;81:149-80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R. Structure-activity relationship studies of chemical mutagens and carcinogens: mechanistic investigations and prediction approaches. Chem Revs 2005;105:1767-800
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Netzeva TI, Worth AP. Collection and evaluation of (Q)SAR models for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity. EUR 22772 EN. 2007. Luxenbourg, Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities. EUR–Scientific and Technical Research Series. 12-7-2007
   Google Scholar
• Elespuru RK, Agarwal R, Atrakchi AH, Current and future application of genetic toxicity assays: the role and value of in vitro mammalian assays. Toxicol Sci 2009;109:172-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalluri R, Zeisberg M. Fibroblasts in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2009;6:392-401
   Google Scholar
• Brock A, Chang H, Huang S. Non-genetic heterogeneity–a mutation-independent driving force for the somatic evolution of tumours. Nat Revs Genetics 2009;10:336-49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett JC, Ts'o PO. Evidence for the progressive nature of neoplastic transformation in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1978;75:3761-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berwald Y, Sachs L. In vitro transformation of normal cells to tumour cells by carcinogenic hydrocarbons. J Natl Cancer Inst 1965;35:641-61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berwald Y, Sachs L. In vitro cell transformation with chemical carcinogens. Nature 1963;200:1182-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiziani S, Lopes V, Gunther UL. Early stage diagnosis of oral cancer using 1H NMR-based metabolomics. Neoplasia 2009;11:269-76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin JL, Bollard ME. Metabonomics: its potential as a tool in toxicology for safety assessment and data integration. Curr Drug Metab 2004;5:389-98
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim J-W, Dang CV. Cancer's molecular sweet tooth and the warburg effect. Cancer Res 2006;66:8927-30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar