Liver tumour promoting activity of 3,4,5,3′,4′-pentachlorobiphenyl and its interaction with 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin

Hemming, H. G.; Bager, Yvonne; Flodström, Sten; Nordgren, Ingrid; Kronevi, Tony; Ahlborg, Ulf G.; Wärngård, Lars

doi:10.1016/0926-6917(95)90028-4

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on their results authors arrived at the conclusion that TCDD equivalency factors (TEQ) can be regarded as a rough estimate for the tumor promoting potency of dioxin mixtures. The principally same conclusion was drawn by Hemming and colleagues from the result of their study, in which they investigated the interaction between TCDD and the co-planar PCB-126 in promotion of rat liver foci and observed additivity of carcinogenic eVects of the two chemicals (Hemming et al, 1995). This result is not unexpected if one assumes that both CYP1A induction and promotional activity of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs are produced via the same pathway, namely by activation of the Ah receptor.…”

Section: Additivity Of Carcinogenic Evects Of Complex Mixtures?supporting

confidence: 67%

“…Similarly, in a study of van der Plas and colleagues, addition of PCB-153 to a mixture of TCDD and other dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs led only to a very slight increase in preneoplastic response in rat liver, when tested in an initiation/promotion bioassay (van der Plas et al, 1999). The results of the two studies are in contrast, however, to the results of an earlier investigation in which a synergistic action of PCB-126 and PCB-153 in promotion of liver foci in rats was reported (Hemming et al, 1995). The most comprehensive study on PCB mixtures was conducted and published by Mayes and colleagues .…”

Section: Additivity Of Carcinogenic Evects Of Complex Mixtures?mentioning

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carcinogenic risks of dioxin: Mechanistic considerations

Schwarz

Appel

2005

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Additivity Of Carcinogenic Evects Of Complex Mixtures?supporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Additivity Of Carcinogenic Evects Of Complex Mixtures?mentioning

confidence: 76%

Carcinogenic risks of dioxin: Mechanistic considerations

Schwarz

Appel

2005

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The WHO 1998 TEF was set at 0.1, which is at the median of the REP distribution range of 20 in vivo studies. This 1998 TEF value was mainly driven by the tumor promotion study with this compound (Hemming et al, 1995). New in vivo studies from the NTP covering many endpoints (Johnson et al, 2000;Walker et al, 2005) support the TEF of 0.1.…”

Section: Pcb 126mentioning

confidence: 96%

The 2005 World Health Organization Reevaluation of Human and Mammalian Toxic Equivalency Factors for Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds

Berg¹,

Birnbaum²,

Denison³

et al. 2006

Toxicological Sciences

3,244

1,882

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In June 2005, a World Health Organization (WHO)-International Programme on Chemical Safety expert meeting was held in Geneva during which the toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for dioxin-like compounds, including some polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), were reevaluated. For this reevaluation process, the refined TEF database recently published by Haws et al. (2006, Toxicol. Sci. 89, 4-30) was used as a starting point. Decisions about a TEF value were made based on a combination of unweighted relative effect potency (REP) distributions from this database, expert judgment, and point estimates. Previous TEFs were assigned in increments of 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, etc., but for this reevaluation, it was decided to use half order of magnitude increments on a logarithmic scale of 0.03, 0.1, 0.3, etc. Changes were decided by the expert panel for 2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran (PeCDF) (TEF = 0.3), 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran (PeCDF) (TEF = 0.03), octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and octachlorodibenzofuran (TEFs = 0.0003), 3,4,4',5-tetrachlorbiphenyl (PCB 81) (TEF = 0.0003), 3,3',4,4',5,5'-hexachlorobiphenyl (PCB 169) (TEF = 0.03), and a single TEF value (0.00003) for all relevant mono-ortho-substituted PCBs. Additivity, an important prerequisite of the TEF concept was again confirmed by results from recent in vivo mixture studies. Some experimental evidence shows that non-dioxin-like aryl hydrocarbon receptor agonists/antagonists are able to impact the overall toxic potency of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and related compounds, and this needs to be investigated further. Certain individual and groups of compounds were identified for possible future inclusion in the TEF concept, including 3,4,4'-TCB (PCB 37), polybrominated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans, mixed polyhalogenated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans, polyhalogenated naphthalenes, and polybrominated biphenyls. Concern was expressed about direct application of the TEF/total toxic equivalency (TEQ) approach to abiotic matrices, such as soil, sediment, etc., for direct application in human risk assessment. This is problematic as the present TEF scheme and TEQ methodology are primarily intended for estimating exposure and risks via oral ingestion (e.g., by dietary intake). A number of future approaches to determine alternative or additional TEFs were also identified. These included the use of a probabilistic methodology to determine TEFs that better describe the associated levels of uncertainty and "systemic" TEFs for blood and adipose tissue and TEQ for body burden.

show abstract

“…The addition of PCB-153 slightly increased the mean volume of foci and volume fraction of foci in the liver, but still not above that produced by TCDD alone. TCDD and PCB-126 (non-ortho) were found to have an additive effect in another study (Hemming et al, 1995).…”

Section: (Iii) Combinations Of Individual Congenersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Polybrominated Biphenyls

Agudo

Aronson²,

Bonefeld-Jörgensen³

et al. 2008

Organic Pollutants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

initiated a programme on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans involving the production of critically evaluated monographs on individual chemicals. The programme was subsequently expanded to include evaluations of carcinogenic risks associated with exposures to complex mixtures, lifestyle factors and biological and physical agents, as well as those in specific occupations. The objective of the programme is to elaborate and publish in the form of monographs critical reviews of data on carcinogenicity for agents to which humans are known to be exposed and on specific exposure situations; to evaluate these data in terms of human risk with the help of international working groups of experts in carcinogenesis and related fields; and to indicate where additional research efforts are needed. The lists of IARC evaluations are regularly updated and are available on the Internet at http:// monographs.iarc.fr/.This programme has been supported since 1982 by Cooperative Agreement U01 CA33193 with the United States National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services. Additional support has been provided since 1986 by the European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs, and Inclusion, initially by the Unit of Health, Safety and Hygiene at Work, and since 2014 by the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation "EaSI" (2014-2020) The International Agency for Research on Cancer welcomes requests for permission to reproduce or translate its publications, in part or in full. Requests for permission to reproduce or translate IARC publications -whether for sale or for non-commercial distribution -should be addressed to the IARC Communications Group at: publications@iarc.fr.The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city, or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers' products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters.The IARC Monographs Working Group alone is responsible for the views expressed in this publication. IARC Library Cataloguing in Publication Data NOTE TO THE READERThe term 'carcinogenic risk' in the IARC Monographs series is taken to mean that an agent is capable of causing cancer. The Monographs evaluate cancer hazards, despite the historical presence of the word 'risks' in the title.Inclusion of an agent in the Monographs does not imply that it is a carcinogen, only that the published data have been examined. Equally, the fact that an agent has not yet been evaluated in a Monograph does not mean that...

show abstract

Liver tumour promoting activity of 3,4,5,3′,4′-pentachlorobiphenyl and its interaction with 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin

Cited by 18 publications

References 20 publications

Carcinogenic risks of dioxin: Mechanistic considerations

Carcinogenic risks of dioxin: Mechanistic considerations

The 2005 World Health Organization Reevaluation of Human and Mammalian Toxic Equivalency Factors for Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds

Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Polybrominated Biphenyls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About