Extrapolation from Long Term Low Dose Animal Studies — I. Review

  • M. F. Cranmer
Part of the Environmental Science Research book series (ESRH, volume 21)


Undeniably chemical technology has in large measure contributed to the achievement of our present standard of living. It produced many of the tools and resources needed to reduce human suffering and modify selective pressures of our environment. Accompanying these benefits, however, is the possibility that toxic properties of certain chemicals have the potential to threaten our health. A rational policy of utilization of chemicals is to produce the highest standard of living consistent with a quantitatively acceptable hazard-to-benefit ratio.


Confidence Limit Weibull Distribution Tumor Incidence Extrapolation Procedure Dietary Concentration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abbott, (1925): A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. of Economic Entomology, 18:265–267.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albert, R.E. and Altshuler, B., (1973): Considerations relating to the formulation of limits for unavoidable population exposures to environmental carcinogens. In Rationale of Carcinogenesis, Ballou, J.E. et. al eds., AEC Symposium Series, CONF-72050, NTIS, Springfield, Va., pp. 223–253.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson, (1979): Discontinuities in dose response curves from toxicological tests. Paper presented at the Soap and Detergents Manufacturers Association (Boca Raton, Florida). January 27, 1979.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blum, H.F., (1959): Carcinogenesis by ultraviolet light. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bryan, W.R. and Skimkin, M.B., (1943): Quantitative analysis of dose-response data obtained with three carcinogenic hydrocarbons in strain C3H male mice. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 3:503–531.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cairns, (1979): The ED01 Study: Introduction, objectives, and experimental design. In Innovations in Cancer Risk Assessment (ED01 Study), (J. Staffa and M. Mehlman, eds.), pp. 1–7, Pathotox Publishers, Inc., Park Forest South, Illinois.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chand, N. and Hoel, D.G., (1973): A comparison of models for determining safe levels of environmental agents. Conference on Reliability and Biometry, Florida State University, Tallahassee.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chou, T.-C., (1976): Derivation and properties of Michaelis-Menten type and Hill type equations for reference ligands, J. Theoret. Biol., 59:253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chou, T.-C., (1980): Comparison of dose-effect relationships of carcinogens following low-dose chronic exposure and high-dose single injection: an analysis by the median-effect principle. Carcinogenesis, 1:203–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cook, P.J., Doll, R., and Fellingham, S.A., (1969): A mathematical model for the age distribution of cancer in man. Int. J. Cancer, 4:93–112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1974): Reflections in Toxicology. Journal of Washington Academy of Sciences 64(2):158–179.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1977): Hazards of Pesticide Development and Mammalian Toxicity: Carcinogenicity, Teratogenicity, and Mutagenicity. Proceedings of XV International Congress of Entomology, 719-736.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1977): Estimation of risks due to environmental carcinogensis. Medical and Pediatric Oncology, 3(2):169–198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1978): Report to the Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration on the Hazards and Risks of Saccharin, 800 Pages. FDA Publication.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1978): Toxicology of families of chemials used as herbicides in forestry. Proceedings USDA/EPA Symposium, the Use of Herbicides in Forestry. USDA Publication.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1979): Scientific basis for regulatory decisions on saccharin. Health and Sugar Substitutes. S. Karger, 281-287.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1979): The design criteria and application of dose response relatioships to interpretation of carcinogenesis bioassay. Regulatory Aspects of Carcinogenesis and Food Additives: The Delaney Clause. Academic Press, 147-172.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cranmer, M.F.: Use of animal and laboratory tests to screen for toxic effects. Proceedings of the Third Joint US-USSR Symposium on Comprehensive Analysis of the Environment, Tashkent, Russia. EPA Publication.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cranmer, M.F., (1981): Extrapolation from long term low dose animal studies. II. The ED01 study. In: Measurement of risks, G.G. Berg, et al., eds., Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Crump, K.S., Guess, H.A., and Deal, K.L., (1977): Confidence intervals and test of hypotheses concerning dose response relations inferred from animal carcinogenicity data. Biometrics 33:437–451.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Crump, K.S., Hoel, D.G., Langley, C.H., and Peto, R., (1976): Fundamental carcinogenic processes and their implications for low dose risk assessment. Cancer Res. 36:2973–2979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Day, T.D., (1967): Carcinogenic actions of cigarette smoke condensate on mouse skin. Br. J. Cancer, 21:56–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Doll, R., (1971): The Age Distribution of Cancer: Implications for Models of Carcinogensis. J. Royal Stat. Soc. 134:136–166.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Draft Final Report: NTA. April 22, 1980.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Druckrey, H., (1967): Quantitative aspects in chemical carcinogenesis. Potential hazards from drugs, in U.I.C.C. Monograph Ser. 7:60–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Druckrey, H., Schmahl, D. and Discher, W., (1963): Dose action relation of the cancer production by 4-dimethyl-aminostibene in rats. Z. Krebsforsch, 65:272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Food Safety Council: Report of the Scientific Committee (1978). Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 16: Supplement 2, 1–136.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gaylor, D.W. and Kodell, R.L., (1980): Linear interpolation algorithm for low dose risk assessment of toxic substances.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Guess, H.A., Crump, K.S., and Peto, R., (1977): Uncertainty estimates for low-dose-rate extrapolations of animal carcinogenicity data. Cancer Res. 37:3475–3483.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hoel, D.G., (1972): A representation of mortality data by competing risks. Biometrics, 28:475–488.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kennedy, Donald (1980): Nitrites: FDA beats a surprising retreat. Science, 209, No. 4461:1100-1101, September 5.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lee, P.N. and O’Neill, J.A., (1971): The effect both of time and dose applied on tumor incidence rate in benzopyrene skin painting experiments. Br. J. Cancer 25:759–770.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Murray, J.L. and Axtell, L.M., (1974): Impact of cancer: years of life lost due to cancer mortality. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 52:3–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Peto, R., (1978): Carcinogenesis effects of chronic exposure to very low levels of toxic substances. Environ. Health Perspectives, 22:155–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Peto, R. and Lee, P.N., (1973): Weibull distributions for continuous carcinogenesis experiments. Biometrics, 29:457–470.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Peto, R., Lee, P.N. and Paige, W.S., (1972): Statistical analysis of the bioassay of continuous carcinogens. Br. J. Cancer, 26:258–261.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Peto, R., Roe, F.J.C., Lee, P,N., Levy, L., and Clack, J., (1975): Cancer and aging in mice and men, Br. J. Cancer, 32:411–426.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pike, M.C., (1966): A method of analysis of a certain class of experiments in carcinogenesis, Biometrics, 22:142–161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sontag, J.M., Cranmer, M.F., Page, N.P., and Cueto, C., (1976): Experimental design and toxicology. In: Report of the temporary committee for the review of data on carcinogenicity of cyclamate, DHEW Publication No. (NIH)-77-1437.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wodicka, V.O., Goldberg, L., and Carr, C.J., (1978): Proposed system for food safety assessment. Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 16(Suppl. 2):1–136.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. F. Cranmer
    • 1
  1. 1.Jefferson Professional ServicesLittle RockUSA

Personalised recommendations