Genotoxic exposure assessment

Overall, cancer risk assessment involves the four steps of hazard identification, dose-response, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. The dose-response curve established for cancer potency derivation for a chemical is based on evaluation of data on the carcinogenicity and dose-response characteristics of the chemical. The pharmacokinetics and mechanistic data evaluation (e.g., genotoxic or nongenotoxic) and a dose-response review of all adequate bioassays are conducted to determine, if target dose estimates or a dose-response model different from the default may be suggested. 

Genotoxicity tests for monitoring DNA damage and repair (exposure assessment)... 

Exposure assessment -Exposure dose -Genotoxic -Half-Life -Human health risk assessment -Immediate versus Delayed Toxicity -... 

Since in vivo tests in exposed human populations would involve concomitant exposure to other toxicants, it would be difficult to assess the genotoxic potential of methyl parathion alone. Therefore, additional well-designed in vitro studies using human cell lines are needed to determine the effects of methyl parathion on various genotoxic parameters (e.g., sister chromatid exchange, chromosomal aberrations, unscheduled DNA synthesis). 

This study, like that of Fisher and Allen (1993), incorporated a linear multistage model. However, the mechanism of trichloroethylene carcinogenicity appears to be non-genotoxic, and a non-linear model (as opposed to the linearized multistage model) has been proposed for use along with PBPK modeling for cancer risk assessment. The use of this non-linear model has resulted in a 100-fold increase in the virtually safe lifetime exposure estimates (Clewell et al. 1995). 

Longstaff, E., M.Robinson, C.Bradbrook, J.A.Styles, and I.E.H.Purchase. 1984. Genotoxicity and carcinogenicity of fluorocarbons Assessment by short-term in vitro tests and chronic exposure in rats. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 72 15-31. 

Mutagenicity and carcinogenicity are generally considered to be non-threshold effects, unless a non-genotoxic mechanism can be established with a NOEL (or NOAEL or LOAEL). Risk assessment is based on establishing whether exposure is prevented. A similar process of preventing exposure also applies for skin and respiratory sensitisers, since there is no means of identifying a dose or concentration below which adverse effects will not occur in someone already sensitised to a particular substance. 

An additional assessment factor, of up to 10, has been apphed in some cases where the NOAEL has been derived for a critical effect, which is considered as a severe and irreversible effect, such as teratogenicity or non-genotoxic carcinogenicity, especially if associated with a shallow dose-response relationship. The principal rationale for an additional factor for nature of toxicity has been to provide a greater margin between the exposure of any particularly susceptible humans and the dose-response curve for such toxicity in experimental animals. 

Valid epidemiological studies are preferable for the quantitative risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens for the purpose of deriving a tolerable intake. If such data are available, for example in the working environment, they can be used quantitatively to convert work exposure to lifetime exposure, i.e., to convert intermittent exposure to continuous exposure (see Section 5.1 for adjustment of concentrations). However, as addressed in Chapter 3, valid human data are seldom available. 

The Margin of Exposure (MOE) in the context of the assessment of compounds that are both genotoxic and carcinogenic, as defined in EFSA (2005), is different from the OECD/IPCS definition given above The Margin of Exposure (MOE) is the ratio between a defined point on the dose-response curve (reference point) for the adverse effect of the compound in the animal carcinogenicity study and the estimated human intake of the compound. ... 

---