4.4 Article

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

Journal

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 69, Issue 2, Pages 234-242

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.04.009

Keywords

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

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available