Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2014 Jul;69(2):234-42. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.04.009. Epub 2014 Apr 24.

Advancing the 3Rs in regulatory toxicology - Carcinogenicity testing: Scope for harmonisation and advancing the 3Rs in regulated sectors of the European Union.

Author information

1
CEFIC, Brussels, Belgium.
2
Dow AgroSciences, Abingdon, UK.
3
IFAH-Europe, Brussels, Belgium.
4
Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany.
5
Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.
6
Evita Services, Craigavon, Northern Ireland, UK.
7
European Partnership for Alternatives to Animal Testing (EPAA), Brussels, Belgium.
8
University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
9
Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
10
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
11
Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
12
RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
13
TSGE Consulting Ltd Knaresborough, UK. Electronic address: Kevin.Woodward@TSGEurope.com.

Abstract

Different government agencies operating in the European Union regulate different types of chemical products but all require testing for carcinogenicity to support applications for product marketing and commercialisation. A conference was held in Brussels in 2013 where representatives of the pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection industries, together with representatives of regulatory agencies, universities and other stakeholders, met under the auspices of The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) to discuss the varying requirements for carcinogenicity testing, and how these studies might be refined to improve hazard evaluation and risk assessment while implementing principles of the 3Rs (replacement, refinement and reduction in animal studies). While there are some similarities, the regulatory approaches in pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection sectors have varying degrees of flexibility in requirements for carcinogenicity testing, to an extent reflecting concerns over the magnitude and duration of human exposure, either directly as in therapeutic exposure to pharmaceuticals, or indirectly through the ingestion of residues of veterinary drugs or plant protection chemicals. The article discusses these differences and other considerations for modified carcinogenicity testing paradigms on the basis of scientific and 3Rs approaches.

KEYWORDS:

Carcinogenicity; Chemicals; Genotoxicity; Pharmaceuticals; Plant protection; Reduction; Refinement; Replacement; Transgenic; Veterinary drugs

PMID:
24768934
DOI:
10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.04.009
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center