Tumors in Control Hamsters, Rats, and Mice: Literature Tabulation

Sher, Sanford P.; Hamm, Thomas E.

doi:10.3109/10408448209033631

Cited by 50 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All neoplasms occurring with a frequency of 0.5% or more are listed. The current database contains information beginning with those studies reported in Technical Report 193 through those studies whose pathology diagnoses were finalized in CBDS as of March, 1983. Comparing these rates with previous tabulations of control tumor incidences for F344 rats and B6C3F, mice [l, 4, 8-10, [13][14][15][16][17] showed that the incidence of several neoplasms are significantly higher in the current database. For F344 rats, the most notable increases as compared to Goodman et al [9] arc mononuclear cell leukemia (males: 28% vs. 12%; females: 17% vs. lo%), pituitary adenoma (males: 22% vs. 11%; females: 44% vs. 29%) and adrenal pheochromocytoma (males: 18% vs. 9%).…”

Section: Previous Investigators [3 'I] Have Recognizedmentioning

confidence: 62%

Use of Historical Control Data in Carcinogenicity Studies in Rodents

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper considers the use of historical control data in the evaluation of tumor incidences from carcinogenicity studies in rodents. Although the most appropriate control group for interpretative purposes is always the concurrent control, there are instances in which the use of historical control information can aid an investigator in the overall evaluation of tumor incidence data. One example is rare tumors; another is a tumor that shows a marginally significant result relative to concurrent controls. However, before historical control data can be used in a formal testing framework, a number of important issues must first be considered. The nomenclature conventions and diagnostic criteria for each study should be identical to insure unambiguous identification of all relevant tumors in the historical control database. Criteria should be established that will aid in determining whether a particular study should be included in the database. This will assure a homogeneous set of studies upon which to base statistical comparisons. Since study-to-study variability in tumor rates may exceed what would be expected by chance alone, these sources of variability should be identified and controlled. Finally, statistical procedures should be employed that adjust for extra-binomial variability. This paper also summarizes tumor incidence data from untreated Fischer 344 rats and B6C3F1 mice in the National Toxicology Program (NTP) historical control database. All studies in the database are of two years duration, and all neoplasms occurring with a frequency of 0.5% or more are reported.

show abstract

Section: Previous Investigators [3 'I] Have Recognizedmentioning

confidence: 62%

Use of Historical Control Data in Carcinogenicity Studies in Rodents

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Predilection sites for amelanotic melanomas in rats are ear pinna, eyelid, scrotum and perianal area. ( 7 Bader et al, 1993; 14 Bogovski, 1994; 28 Deerberg et al, 1986; 33 Evans et al, 1997; 64 Kanno, 1989; 67 Kort et al, 1984; 99 Peckham and Heider, 1999; 103 Ramon y Cajal et al, 1991; 132 Weiss and Frese, 1974; 136 Yoshitomi and Boorman, 1993; 138 Yoshitomi et al, 1995; 141 Zackheim et al, 1990; 143 Zurcher and Roholl, 1989; 144 Zwicker et al, 1992; 18 Burek, 1978; 131 Ward et al, 1979; 112 Sher, 1982; 115 Sommer, 1997; 42 Goerttler et al, 1984; 11 Berkelhammer and Oxenhandler, 1987)…”

Section: Nomenclaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Proliferative and Non-Proliferative Lesions of the Rat and Mouse Integument

Mecklenburg¹,

Kusewitt

Kolly

et al. 2013

J Toxicol Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The INHAND (International Harmonization of Nomenclature and Diagnostic Criteria for Lesions in Rats and Mice) project is a joint initiative of the societies of toxicological pathology from Europe (ESTP), Great Britain (BSTP), Japan (JSTP) and North America (STP). Its aim is to develop an internationally-accepted nomenclature for proliferative and non-proliferative lesions in laboratory rodents. A widely accepted international harmonization of nomenclature in laboratory animals will decrease confusion among regulatory and scientific research organizations in different countries and will provide a common language to increase and enrich international exchanges of information among toxicologists and pathologists. The purpose of this publication is to provide a standardized nomenclature for classifying microscopical lesions observed in the integument of laboratory rats and mice. Example colour images are provided for most lesions. The standardized nomenclature presented in this document and additional colour images are also available electronically at http://www.goreni.org. The nomenclature presented herein is based on histopathology databases from government, academia, and industrial laboratories throughout the world, and covers lesions that develop spontaneously as well as those induced by exposure to various test materials. (DOI: 10.1293/tox.26.27S; J Toxicol Pathol 2013; 26: 27S–57S)

show abstract

“…An important factor in interpreting rodent carcinogenicity assay results is that although most tissue sites in the body are potentially at risk for tumorigenesis, carcinogens cause tumors at relatively few sites. Also, virtually all species and strains of rodents that have been observed for a major portion of their lifespan and examined in sufficient numbers have exhibited characteristic age-dependent patterns of spontaneous neoplasms Moloney et al, 1970;Murphy, 1975;Hoag, 1963;Russell, 1975;Sher, 1982;Ward et al, 19791 that may also influence the tumorigenic response to a chemical carcinogen. The operational definition of carcinogens used by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the NTP states that a chemical can be recognized as a carcinogen if it causes the induction of more tumors or decreases the time for detecting tumors that are commonly seen, or if it induces tumors that are not usually seen in the test animals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of multiple parameters of rodent carcinogenicity and in vitro genetic toxicity

1986

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between chemically induced patterns of tumorigenesis in rodents and of in vitro genetic toxicity was evaluated for 73 substances. tumorigenicity patterns were defined according to sex and species effects, the induction of common or uncommon tumors, and benign or malignant tumors. These results and the genetic toxicity results derived from the testing of chemicals under code were compared. Chemicals that induced tumors in both sexes of both rodent species (trans-sex/species carcinogens) were divided into those that showed multiple responses in genetic toxicity assays and those that showed little or no response. Some of the nongenotoxic trans-sex/species carcinogens exhibit properties that do not necessarily fit classification as only tumor promoters and may involve some other mode(s) of action. Those chemicals showing tumorigenicity in only one of the four groups exposed (uni-sex/species carcinogens) generally showed little or no response in genetic toxicity assays. Uni-sex/species carcinogens may be difficult to identify by in vitro assays because of their high tissue specificity. Chemicals that are tumorigenic in both sexes of both species are logically more likely to be tumorigenic in a third species than are those that are tumorigenic in only one sex of the exposed species. Therefore, while positive genetic toxicity test results are not predictive of all carcinogens, a consistent positive response among the multiple endpoints in these assays is more likely to identify chemicals with the potential for trans-sex/species carcinogenesis. Such trans-sex/species carcinogens may have the most direct implication for human health effects.

show abstract

Tumors in Control Hamsters, Rats, and Mice: Literature Tabulation

Cited by 50 publications

References 71 publications

Use of Historical Control Data in Carcinogenicity Studies in Rodents

Use of Historical Control Data in Carcinogenicity Studies in Rodents

Proliferative and Non-Proliferative Lesions of the Rat and Mouse Integument

Comparison of multiple parameters of rodent carcinogenicity and in vitro genetic toxicity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About