Cited by 131Carcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentAnimal testing and alternativesAgricultural safety and regulations

Interspecies extrapolation in carcinogenesis: prediction between rats and mice.

Open access
Gold, L S, Bernstein, L, Magaw, R, Slone, T H·1989·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

Interspecies extrapolation in carcinogenesis is studied by evaluating prediction from rats to mice and from mice to rats. The Carcinogenic Potency Database, which includes 3500 cancer tests conducted in rats or mice on 955 compounds, is used for the analysis. About half of the chemicals tested for carcinogenicity are positive in at least one test, and this proportion is similar when rats and mice are considered separately. For 392 chemicals tested in both species, 76% of the rat carcinogens are positive in the mouse, and 70% of mouse carcinogens are positive in the rat. When compounds composed solely of chlorine, carbon, hydrogen, and, optionally, oxygen are excluded from the analysis, 75% of mouse carcinogens are positive in the rat. Overall concordance (the percentage positive in both species plus the percentage negative in both) is 76%. Three factors that affect prediction between rats and mice are discussed: chemical class, mutagenicity in the Salmonella assay, and the dose level at which a chemical is toxic. Prediction is more accurate for mutagens than non-mutagens and for substances that are toxic at low (versus only at high) doses. Species differences are not the result of failure in the bioassay to attain the maximum tolerated dose in the negative species or of more frequent testing in the positive species. An analysis of the predictive value of positivity for the 10 most common target sites indicates that most sites are good predictors of carcinogenicity at some site in the other species; the poorest predictors among these common sites are the rat urinary bladder and the mouse liver.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1289/ehp.8981211

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Innes, J. R. M. Evaluation of Carcinogenic, Teratogenic, and Muta- genic Activities of Selected Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals, Vol. 1, Carcinogenic Study. Bionetics Research Laboratories, Inc., National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, 1968.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gold, L. S., Bernstein, L., Magaw, R., & Slone, T. H.
Affiliations
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
1989-05
Volume
81
Pages
211-219
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W2101380195
Cited by
131
References
29
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Environmental Health Perspectives (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (222-Y01-ES-10066)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
Keywords
interspecies extrapolation, carcinogenesis, carcinogenicity prediction, chemical classes, Salmonella mutagenicity, dose levels, target sites, urinary bladder, liver, species differences
MeSH terms
Animals, Carcinogens, Female, Male, Neoplasms, Experimental, Predictive Value of Tests, Species Specificity, Carcinogenicity Tests, Mice, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review