530
Views
44
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review Article

Benchmark dose and the three Rs. Part II. Consequences for study design and animal use

Pages 568-580 | Received 13 Nov 2013, Accepted 14 May 2014, Published online: 07 Jul 2014

References

  • 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.
  • Gaylor DW, Chen JJ, Kodell RL. (1985). Experimental design of bioassays for screening and low dose extrapolations. Risk Anal, 5, 9–16.
  • 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.
  • Kavlock RJ, Schmid JE, Setzer RW. (1996). A simulation study of the influence of study design on the estimation of benchmark doses for developmental toxicity. Risk Anal, 16, 399–410.
  • Krewski D, Smythe R, Fung KY. (2002). Optimal designs for estimating the effective dose in developmental toxicity experiments. Risk Anal, 22, 1195–205.
  • Moerbeek M, Piersma AH, Slob W. (2003). A comparison of three methods for calculating confidence intervals for the benchmark dose. Risk Anal, 24, 31–40.
  • Portier C, Hoel D. (1983). Optimal design of the chronic animal bioassay. J Toxicol Environ Health, 12, 1–19.
  • Portier CJ, Hoel DG. (1984). Design of animal carcinogenicity studies for goodness-of-fit of multistage models. Fundam Appl Toxicol, 4, 949–59.
  • Shao K, Small MJ. (2012). Statistical evaluation of toxicological experimental design for Bayesian model averaged benchmark dose estimation with dichotomous data. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J, 18, 1096–119.
  • 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 I. Getting more information from the same number of animals. Crit Rev Toxicol, 44, 557–67.
  • Slob W, Setzer RW. (in prep.). Shape and steepness of toxicological dose-response relationships of quantal endpoints.
  • 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.
  • Wheeler MW, Bailer AJ. (2008). Model averaging software for dichotomous dose response risk estimation. J Stat Software, 26, 1–15.

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.