656
Views
38
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
REVIEW ARTICLE

Benchmark dose and the three Rs. Part I. Getting more information from the same number of animals

Pages 557-567 | Received 13 Nov 2013, Accepted 14 May 2014, Published online: 07 Jul 2014

References

  • Allen BC, Kavlock RJ, Kimmel CA, Faustman EM. (1994). Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. II. Comparison of generic benchmark dose estimates with no observed adverse effects levels. Fundam Appl Toxicol, 23, 487–95.
  • Baird SJS, Cohen JT, Graham JD, Shlyakter AI, Evans JS. (1996). Noncancer risk assessment: a probabilistic alternative to current practice. Human Ecol Risk Assess, 2, 79–102.
  • Batke M, Escher S, Hoffmann-Doerr S, Melber C, Messinger H, Mangelsdorf I. (2011). Evaluation of time extrapolation factors based on the database RepDose. Toxicol Lett, 205, 122–9.
  • Bokkers BGH, Slob W. (2005). A comparison of ratio distributions based on the NOAEL and the benchmark approach for subchronic-to-chronic extrapolation. Toxicol Sci, 85, 1033–40.
  • Bokkers BGH, Slob W. (2007). Deriving a data-based interspecies assessment factor using the NOAEL and the Benchmark dose approach. Crit Rev Toxicol, 37, 353–77.
  • Crump KS. (1984). A new method for determining allowable daily intakes. Fund Appl Toxicol, 4, 854–71.
  • EFSA (2009). European Food Safety Authority. Guidance of the scientific committee on use of the benchmark dose approach in risk assessment. EFSA J, 1150, 1–72.
  • Filipsson AF, Sand S, Nilsson J, Victorin K. (2003). The benchmark dose method-review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment. Crit Rev Toxicol, 33, 505–42.
  • Foster PMD, Auton TR. (1995). Application of benchmark dose risk assessment methodology to developmental toxicity: an industrial view. Toxicol Lett, 82/83, 555–9.
  • Fowles JR, Alexeeff GV, Dodge D. (1999). The use of benchmark dose methodology with acute inhalation lethality data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol, 29, 262–78.
  • Gephart LA, Salminen WF, Nicolich MJ, Pelekis M. (2001). Evaluation of subchronic toxicity data using the benchmark dose approach. Regul Toxicol Pharm, 33, 37–59.
  • Hernandez LG, Van Benthem J, Slob W. (2012). Estimating the carcinogenic potency of chemicals from the in vivo micronucleus test. RIVM report, 340700007, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
  • IPCS. (2009). Principles for Modelling Dose-response for the Risk Assessment of Chemcials. http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc239.pdf. Accessed on 6/4/2014.
  • Izadi H, Grundy JE, Boser R. (2012). Evaluation of the Benchmark Dose for Point of Departure Determination for a Variety of Chemical Classes in Applied Regulatory Settings. Risk Anal, 32, 830–5.
  • Kalberlah F, Föst U, Schneider K. (2002). Time extrapolation and interspecies extrapolation for locally acting substances in case of limited toxicological data. Ann Occup Hyg, 46, 175–85.
  • Kavlock RJ, Allen BC, Faustman EM, Kimmel CA. (1995). Dose-response assessments for developmental toxicity IV. Benchmark doses for fetal weight changes. Fundam Appl Toxicol, 26, 211–22.
  • Öberg M. (2010). Benchmark dose approaches in chemical health risk assessment in relation to number and distress of laboratory animals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol, 58, 451–4.
  • Rennen MAJ, Hakkert BC, Stevenson H, Bos PMJ. (2001)Data-base derived values for the interspecies extrapolation. Comments Toxicol, 7, 423–36.
  • Sand S, Filipsson AF, Victorin K. (2002). Evaluation of the benchmark dose method for dichotomous data: Model dependence and model selection. Regul Toxicol Pharm, 36, 184–97.
  • Setzer RW, Kimmel CA. (2003). Use of NOAEL, benchmark dose, and other models for human risk assessment of hormonally active substances. Pure Appl Chem, 75, 2151–8.
  • Slob W. (2002). Dose-response modeling of continuous endpoints. Toxicol Sci, 66, 298–312.
  • Slob W, Moerbeek M, Rauniomaa E, Piersma AH. (2005). A statistical evaluation of toxicity study designs for the estimation of the Benchmark dose in continuous endpoints. Toxicol Sci, 84, 167–85.
  • Slob W, Setzer RW. (2014). Shape and steepness of toxicological dose-response relationships of continuous endpoints. Crit Rev Toxicol, 44, 270–97.
  • Slob W. (2014). Benchmark dose and the three Rs. Part II. Consequences for study design and animal use. Crit Rev Toxicol, 44, 568–80.
  • Slob W. (in prep.). The relationship between maximum response and within-group variation: an empirical result indicating how to choose relevant effect sizes.
  • Travis KZ, Pate I, Welsh ZK. (2005). The role of the benchmark dose in a regulatory context. Regul Toxicol Pharm, 43, 280–91.
  • US EPA. (2012). Benchmark Dose Technical Guidance. http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/pdfs/benchmark_dose_guidance.pdf. Accessed on 6/4/2014.
  • Vermeire T, Stevenson H, Pieters MN, Rennen M, Slob W, Hakkert BC. (1999). Assessment factors for human health risk assessment: a discussion paper. Crit Rev Toxicol, 29, 439–90.
  • Wheeler MW, Bailer AJ. (2007). Properties of model-averaged BMDLs: a study of model averaging in dichotomous response risk estimation. Risk Anal, 27, 659–70.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.