Could Removing Arsenic from Tobacco Smoke Significantly Reduce Smoker Risks of Lung Cancer?

If a specific biological mechanism could be determined by which a carcinogen increases lung cancer risk, how might this knowledge be used to improve risk assessment? To explore this issue, we assume (perhaps incorrectly) that arsenic in cigarette smoke increases lung cancer risk by hypermethylating the promoter region of gene p16INK4a, leading to a more rapid entry of altered (initiated) cells into a clonal expansion phase. The potential impact on lung cancer of removing arsenic is then quantified using a three‐stage version of a multistage clonal expansion (MSCE) model. This refines the usual two‐stage clonal expansion (TSCE) model of carcinogenesis by resolving its intermediate or “initiated” cell compartment into two subcompartments, representing experimentally observed “patch” and “field” cells. This refinement allows p16 methylation effects to be represented as speeding transitions of cells from the patch state to the clonally expanding field state. Given these assumptions, removing arsenic might greatly reduce the number of nonsmall cell lung cancer cells (NSCLCs) produced in smokers, by up to two‐thirds, depending on the fraction (between 0 and 1) of the smoking‐induced increase in the patch‐to‐field transition rate prevented if arsenic were removed. At present, this fraction is unknown (and could be as low as zero), but the possibility that it could be high (close to 1) cannot be ruled out without further data.     

Symmetry, Identifiability, and Prediction Uncertainties in Multistage Clonal Expansion (MSCE) Models of Carcinogenesis

Many models of exposure-related carcinogenesis, including traditional linearized multistage models and more recent two-stage clonal expansion (TSCE) models, belong to a family of models in which cells progress between successive stages-possibly undergoing proliferation at some stages-at rates that may depend (usually linearly) on biologically effective doses. Biologically effective doses, in turn, may depend nonlinearly on administered doses, due to PBPK nonlinearities. This article provides an exact mathematical analysis of the expected number of cells in the last ("malignant") stage of such a "multistage clonal expansion" (MSCE) model as a function of dose rate and age. The solution displays symmetries such that several distinct sets of parameter values provide identical fits to all epidemiological data, make identical predictions about the effects on risk of changes in exposure levels or timing, and yet make significantly different predictions about the effects on risk of changes in the composition of exposure that affect the pharmacodynamic dose-response relation. Several different predictions for the effects of such an intervention (such as reducing carcinogenic constituents of an exposure) that acts on only one or a few stages of the carcinogenic process may be equally consistent with all preintervention epidemiological data. This is an example of nonunique identifiability of model parameters and predictions from data. The new results on nonunique model identifiability presented here show that the effects of an intervention on changing age-specific cancer risks in an MSCE model can be either large or small, but that which is the case cannot be predicted from preintervention epidemiological data and knowledge of biological effects of the intervention alone. Rather, biological data that identify which rate parameters hold for which specific stages are required to obtain unambiguous predictions. From epidemiological data alone, only a set of equally likely alternative predictions can be made for the effects on risk of such interventions.     

A Cellular Dynamics Model of Experimental Bladder Cancer: Analysis of the Effect of Sodium Saccharin in the Rat

To make the methodology of risk assessment more consistent with the realities of biological processes, a computer-based model of the carcinogenic process may be used. A previously developed probabilistic model, which is based on a two-stage theory of carcinogenesis, represents urinary bladder carcinogenesis at the cellular level with emphasis on quantification of cell dynamics: cell mitotic rates, cell loss and birth rates, and irreversible cellular transitions from normal to initiated to transformed states are explicitly accounted for. Analyses demonstrate the sensitivity of tumor incidence to the timing and magnitude of changes to these cellular variables. It is demonstrated that response in rats following administration of nongenotoxic compounds, such as sodium saccharin, can be explained entirely on the basis of cytotoxicity and consequent hyperplasia alone.     

What to Do at Low Doses: A Bounding Approach for Economic Analysis

To quantify the health benefits of environmental policies, economists generally require estimates of the reduced probability of illness or death. For policies that reduce exposure to carcinogenic substances, these estimates traditionally have been obtained through the linear extrapolation of experimental dose-response data to low-exposure scenarios as described in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (1986). In response to evolving scientific knowledge, EPA proposed revisions to the guidelines in 1996. Under the proposed revisions, dose-response relationships would not be estimated for carcinogens thought to exhibit nonlinear modes of action. Such a change in cancer-risk assessment methods and outputs will likely have serious consequences for how benefit-cost analyses of policies aimed at reducing cancer risks are conducted. Any tendency for reduced quantification of effects in environmental risk assessments, such as those contemplated in the revisions to EPA's cancer-risk assessment guidelines, impedes the ability of economic analysts to respond to increasing calls for benefit-cost analysis. This article examines the implications for benefit-cost analysis of carcinogenic exposures of the proposed changes to the 1986 Guidelines and proposes an approach for bounding dose-response relationships when no biologically based models are available. In spite of the more limited quantitative information provided in a carcinogen risk assessment under the proposed revisions to the guidelines, we argue that reasonable bounds on dose-response relationships can be estimated for low-level exposures to nonlinear carcinogens. This approach yields estimates of reduced illness for use in a benefit-cost analysis while incorporating evidence of nonlinearities in the dose-response relationship. As an illustration, the bounding approach is applied to the case of chloroform exposure.     

Characterizing Dose-Response Relationships in Multiple Cancer Bioassays

In the evaluation of chemical compounds for carcinogenic risk, regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Toxicology Program (NTP) have traditionally fit a dose-response model to data from rodent bioassays, and then used the fitted model to estimate a Virtually Safe Dose or the dose corresponding to a very small increase (usually 10(-6)) in risk over background. Much recent interest has been directed at incorporating additional scientific information regarding the properties of the specific chemical under investigation into the risk assessment process, including biological mechanisms of cancer induction, metabolic pathways, and chemical structure and activity. Despite the fact that regulatory agencies are currently poised to allow use of nonlinear dose-response models based on the concept of an underlying threshold for nongenotoxic chemicals, there have been few attempts to investigate the overall relationship between the shape of dose-response curves and mutagenicity. Using data from an historical database of NTP cancer bioassays, the authors conducted a repeated-measures Analysis of the estimated shape from fitting extended Weibull dose-response curves. It was concluded that genotoxic chemicals have dose-response curves that are closer to linear than those for nongenotoxic chemicals, though on average, both types of compounds have dose-response curves that are convex and the effect of genotoxicity is small.     

Dose-Response and Risk Assessment of Airborne Hexavalent Chromium and Lung Cancer Mortality

This study evaluates the dose-response relationship for inhalation exposure to hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] and lung cancer mortality for workers of a chromate production facility, and provides estimates of the carcinogenic potency. The data were analyzed using relative risk and additive risk dose-response models implemented with both Poisson and Cox regression. Potential confounding by birth cohort and smoking prevalence were also assessed. Lifetime cumulative exposure and highest monthly exposure were the dose metrics evaluated. The estimated lifetime additional risk of lung cancer mortality associated with 45 years of occupational exposure to 1 microg/m3 Cr(VI) (occupational exposure unit risk) was 0.00205 (90%CI: 0.00134, 0.00291) for the relative risk model and 0.00216 (90%CI: 0.00143, 0.00302) for the additive risk model assuming a linear dose response for cumulative exposure with a five-year lag. Extrapolating these findings to a continuous (e.g., environmental) exposure scenario yielded an environmental unit risk of 0.00978 (90%CI: 0.00640, 0.0138) for the relative risk model [e.g., a cancer slope factor of 34 (mg/kg-day)-1] and 0.0125 (90%CI: 0.00833, 0.0175) for the additive risk model. The relative risk model is preferred because it is more consistent with the expected trend for lung cancer risk with age. Based on statistical tests for exposure-related trend, there was no statistically significant increased lung cancer risk below lifetime cumulative occupational exposures of 1.0 mg-yr/m3, and no excess risk for workers whose highest average monthly exposure did not exceed the current Permissible Exposure Limit (52 microg/m3). It is acknowledged that this study had limited power to detect increases at these low exposure levels. These cancer potency estimates are comparable to those developed by U.S. regulatory agencies and should be useful for assessing the potential cancer hazard associated with inhaled Cr(VI).     

Extrapolation of Carcinogenicity Between Species: Qualitative and Quantitative Factors

Prediction of human cancer risk from the results of rodent bioassays requires two types of extrapolation: a qualitative extrapolation from short-lived rodent species to long-lived humans, and a quantitative extrapolation from near-toxic doses in the bioassay to low-level human exposures. Experimental evidence on the accuracy of prediction between closely related species tested under similar experimental conditions (rats, mice, and hamsters) indicates that: (1) if a chemical is positive in one species, it will be positive in the second species about 75% of the time; however, since about 50% of test chemicals are positive in each species, by chance alone one would expect a predictive value between species of about 50%. (2) If a chemical induces tumors in a particular target organ in one species, it will induce tumors in the same organ in the second species about 50% of the time. Similar predictive values are obtained in an analysis of prediction from humans to rats or from humans to mice for known human carcinogens. Limitations of bioassay data for use in quantitative extrapolation are discussed, including constraints on both estimates of carcinogenic potency and of the dose-response in experiments with only two doses and a control. Quantitative extrapolation should be based on an understanding of mechanisms of carcinogenesis, particularly mitogenic effects that are present at high and not low doses.     

Peak Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies and Cancer Risks: Considerations for Regulatory Risk Assessment

We review approaches for characterizing “peak” exposures in epidemiologic studies and methods for incorporating peak exposure metrics in dose–response assessments that contribute to risk assessment. The focus was on potential etiologic relations between environmental chemical exposures and cancer risks. We searched the epidemiologic literature on environmental chemicals classified as carcinogens in which cancer risks were described in relation to “peak” exposures. These articles were evaluated to identify some of the challenges associated with defining and describing cancer risks in relation to peak exposures. We found that definitions of peak exposure varied considerably across studies. Of nine chemical agents included in our review of peak exposure, six had epidemiologic data used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) in dose–response assessments to derive inhalation unit risk values. These were benzene, formaldehyde, styrene, trichloroethylene, acrylonitrile, and ethylene oxide. All derived unit risks relied on cumulative exposure for dose–response estimation and none, to our knowledge, considered peak exposure metrics. This is not surprising, given the historical linear no‐threshold default model (generally based on cumulative exposure) used in regulatory risk assessments. With newly proposed US EPA rule language, fuller consideration of alternative exposure and dose–response metrics will be supported. “Peak” exposure has not been consistently defined and rarely has been evaluated in epidemiologic studies of cancer risks. We recommend developing uniform definitions of “peak” exposure to facilitate fuller evaluation of dose response for environmental chemicals and cancer risks, especially where mechanistic understanding indicates that the dose response is unlikely linear and that short‐term high‐intensity exposures increase risk.     

Cancer Risk Assessment with Intermittent Exposure

Applications of methods for carcinogenic risk assessment often focus on estimating lifetime cancer risk. With intermittent or time-dependent exposures, lifetime risk is often approximated on the basis of a lifetime average daily dose (LADD). In this article, we show that there exists a lifetime equivalent constant dose (LECD) which leads to the same lifetime risk as the actual time-dependent exposure pattern. The ratio C = LECD/LADD then provides a measure of accuracy of risk estimates based on the LADD, as well as a basis for correcting such estimates. Theoretical results derived under the classical multistage model and the two-stage birth-death-mutation model suggest that the maximum value of C, which represents the factor by which the LADD may lead to underestimates of risk, will often lie in the range of 2- to 5-fold. The practical application of these results is illustrated in the case of astronauts subjected to relatively short-term exposure to volatile organics in a closed space station environment, and in the case of the ingestion of pesticide residues in food where consumption patterns vary with age.     

The Fallacy of Ranking Possible Carcinogen Hazards Using the TD50

Ames et al. have proposed a new model for evaluating carcinogenic hazards in the environment. They advocate ranking possible carcinogens on the basis of the TD50, the estimated dose at which 50% of the test animals would get tumors, and extrapolating that ranking to all other doses. We argue that implicit in this methodology is a simplistic and inappropriate statistical model. All carcinogens are assumed to act similarly and to have dose-response curves of the same shape that differ only in the value of one parameter. We show by counterexample that the rank order of cancer potencies for two chemicals can change over a reasonable range of doses. Ames et al.'s use of these TD50 ranks to compare the hazards from low level exposures to contaminants in our food and environment is wholly inappropriate and inaccurate. Their dismissal of public health concern for environmental exposures, in general, based on these comparisons, is not supported by the data.     

A Trichloroethylene Risk Assessment Using a Monte Carlo Analysis of Parameter Uncertainty in Conjunction with Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling

A Monte Carlo simulation is incorporated into a risk assessment for trichloroethylene (TCE) using physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling coupled with the linearized multistage model to derive human carcinogenic risk extrapolations. The Monte Carlo technique incorporates physiological parameter variability to produce a statistically derived range of risk estimates which quantifies specific uncertainties associated with PBPK risk assessment approaches. Both inhalation and ingestion exposure routes are addressed. Simulated exposure scenarios were consistent with those used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their TCE risk assessment. Mean values of physiological parameters were gathered from the literature for both mice (carcinogenic bioassay subjects) and for humans. Realistic physiological value distributions were assumed using existing data on variability. Mouse cancer bioassay data were correlated to total TCE metabolized and area-under-the-curve (blood concentration) trichloroacetic acid (TCA) as determined by a mouse PBPK model. These internal dose metrics were used in a linearized multistage model analysis to determine dose metric values corresponding to 10^-6 lifetime excess cancer risk. Using a human PBPK model, these metabolized doses were then extrapolated to equivalent human exposures (inhalation and ingestion). The Monte Carlo iterations with varying mouse and human physiological parameters produced a range of human exposure concentrations producing a 10^-6 risk.     

Estimating Upper Confidence Limits for Extra Risk in Quantal Multistage Models

Multistage models are frequently applied in carcinogenic risk assessment. In their simplest form, these models relate the probability of tumor presence to some measure of dose. These models are then used to project the excess risk of tumor occurrence at doses frequently well below the lowest experimental dose. Upper confidence limits on the excess risk associated with exposures at these doses are then determined. A likelihood-based method is commonly used to determine these limits. We compare this method to two computationally intensive "bootstrap" methods for determining the 95% upper confidence limit on extra risk. The coverage probabilities and bias of likelihood-based and bootstrap estimates are examined in a simulation study of carcinogenicity experiments. The coverage probabilities of the nonparametric bootstrap method fell below 95% more frequently and by wider margins than the better-performing parametric bootstrap and likelihood-based methods. The relative bias of all estimators are seen to be affected by the amount of curvature in the true underlying dose-response function. In general, the likelihood-based method has the best coverage probability properties while the parametric bootstrap is less biased and less variable than the likelihood-based method. Ultimately, neither method is entirely satisfactory for highly curved dose-response patterns.     

Uncertainty in Cancer Risk Estimates

Several existing databases compiled by Gold et al.^(1–3) for carcinogenesis bioassays are examined to obtain estimates of the reproducibility of cancer rates across experiments, strains, and rodent species. A measure of carcinogenic potency is given by the TD₅₀ (daily dose that causes a tumor type in 50% of the exposed animals that otherwise would not develop the tumor in a standard lifetime). The lognormal distribution can be used to model the uncertainty of the estimates of potency (TD₅₀) and the ratio of TD₅₀'s between two species. For near-replicate bioassays, approximately 95% of the TD₅₀'s are estimated to be within a factor of 4 of the mean. Between strains, about 95% of the TD₅₀'s are estimated to be within a factor of 11 of their mean, and the pure genetic component of variability is accounted for by a factor of 6.8. Between rats and mice, about 95% of the TD₅₀'s are estimated to be within a factor of 32 of the mean, while between humans and experimental animals the factor is 110 for 20 chemicals reported by Allen et al.⁽⁴⁾ The common practice of basing cancer risk estimates on the most sensitive rodent species-strain-sex and using interspecies dose scaling based on body surface area appears to overestimate cancer rates for these 20 human carcinogens by about one order of magnitude on the average. Hence, for chemicals where the dose-response is nearly linear below experimental doses, cancer risk estimates based on animal data are not necessarily conservative and may range from a factor of 10 too low for human carcinogens up to a factor of 1000 too high for approximately 95% of the chemicals tested to date. These limits may need to be modified for specific chemicals where additional mechanistic or pharmacokinetic information may suggest alterations or where particularly sensitive subpopu-lations may be exposed. Supralinearity could lead to anticonservative estimates of cancer risk. Underestimating cancer risk by a specific factor has a much larger impact on the actual number of cancer cases than overestimates of smaller risks by the same factor. This paper does not address the uncertainties in high to low dose extrapolation. If the dose-response is sufficiently nonlinear at low doses to produce cancer risks near zero, then low-dose risk estimates based on linear extrapolation are likely to overestimate risk and the limits of uncertainty cannot be established.     

Carcinogenic Risk Assessment with Time-Dependent Exposure Patterns

Previous applications of carcinogenic risk assessment using mathematical models of carcinogenesis have focused largely on the case where the level of exposure remains constant over time. In many situations, however, the dose of the carcinogen varies with time. In this paper, we discuss both the classical Armitage-Doll multistage model and the Moolgavkar-Venzon-Knudson two-stage birth-death-mutation model with time-dependent dosing regimens. Bounds on the degree of underestimation of risk that can occur through the use of a simple time-weighted average dose are derived by means of comparison with an equivalent constant dose corresponding to the actual risk under the time-dependent dosing regimen.     

One-Hit Models of Carcinogenesis: Conservative or Not?

One-hit formulas are widely believed to be "conservative" when used to analyze carcinogenesis bioassays, in the sense that they will rarely underestimate risks of cancer at low exposures. Such formulas are generally applied to the lifetime incidence of cancer at a specific site, with risks estimated from animal data at zero dose (control), and two or more additional doses that are appreciable fractions of a maximum tolerated dose. No empirical study has demonstrated that the one-hit formula is conservative in the sense described. The Carcinogenesis Bioassay Database System contains data on 1212 separate bioassays of 308 chemical substances tested at exactly three evaluable doses. These provided sufficient data to examine 8432 specific combinations of cancer site with sex, species, and chemical. For each of these we fitted a one-hit formula to the zero and maximum dose data points, then examined the relation of the fitted curve to the incidence rate observed at the mid-dose, with and without adjustment for intercurrent mortality. Both underestimates and overestimates of risk at mid-dose occurred substantially more often than expected by chance. We cannot tell whether such underestimates would occur at lower doses, but offer six biological reasons why underestimates might be expected. In a high percentage of animal bioassays, the one-hit formula is not conservative when applied in the usual way to animal data. It remains possible that the one-hit formula may indeed be conservative at sufficiently low doses (below the observational range), but the usual procedure, applied to the usual dose range, can be nonconservative in estimating the slope of the formula at such low doses. Risk assessments for regulation of carcinogens should incorporate some measure of additional uncertainty.     

Risk Assessment of Nongenotoxic Carcinogens Based upon Cell Proliferation/Death Rates in Rodents

Increased cell proliferation increases the opportunity for transformations of normal cells to malignant cells via intermediate cells. Nongenotoxic cytotoxic carcinogens that increase cell proliferation rates to replace necrotic cells are likely to have a threshold dose for cytotoxicity below which necrosis and hence, carcinogenesis do not occur. Thus, low dose cancer risk estimates based upon nonthreshold, linear extrapolation are inappropriate for this situation. However, a threshold dose is questionable if a nongenotoxic carcinogen acts via a cell receptor. Also, a nongenotoxic carcinogen that increases the cell proliferation rate, via the cell division rate and/or cell removal rate by apoptosis, by augmenting an existing endogenous mechanism is not likely to have a threshold dose. Whether or not a threshold dose exists for nongenotoxic carcinogens, it is of interest to study the relationship between lifetime tumor incidence and the cell proliferation rate. The Moolgavkar–Venzon–Knudson biologically based stochastic two-stage clonal expansion model is used to describe a carcinogenic process. Because the variability in cell proliferation rates among animals often makes it impossible to detect changes of less than 20% in the rate, it is shown that small changes in the cell proliferation rate, that may be obscured by the background noise in rates, can produce large changes in the lifetime tumor incidence as calculated from the Moolgavkar–Venzon–Knudson model. That is, dose response curves for cell proliferation and tumor incidence do not necessarily mimic each other. This makes the use of no observed effect levels (NOELs) for cell proliferation rates often inadmissible for establishing acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) of nongenotoxic carcinogens. In those cases where low dose linearity is not likely, a potential alternative to a NOEL is a benchmark dose corresponding to a small increase in the cell proliferation rate, e. g., 1%, to which appropriate safety (uncertainty) factors can be applied to arrive at an ADI.     

Use of Monte Carlo Simulation for Human Exposure Assessment at a Superfund Site

This work presents a comparison of probabilistic and deterministic health risk estimates based on data from an industrial site in the northeastern United States. The risk assessment considered exposures to volatile solvents by drinking water ingestion and showering. Probability densities used as inputs included concentrations, contact rates, and exposure frequencies; dose-response inputs were single values. Deterministic risk estimates were calculated by the "reasonable maximum exposure" (RME) approach recommended by the EPA Superfund program. The RME non-carcinogenic risk fell between the 90th and the 95th percentile of the probability density; the RME cancer risk fell between the 95th percentile and the maximum. These results suggest that in this case (1) EPA's deterministic RME risk was reasonably protective, (2) results of probabilistic and deterministic calculations were consistent, and (3) commercially available software Monte Carlo software effectively provided multiple risk estimates recommended by recent EPA guidance.     

Chronic Health Risks from Aggregate Exposures to Ionizing Radiation and Chemicals: Scientific Basis for an Assessment Framework

Very little quantitative analysis is currently available on the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple hazardous agents that have either similar or different mechanisms of action. Over the past several years, efforts have been made to develop the methodologies for risk assessment of chemical mixtures, but mixed exposures to two or more dissimilar agents such as radiation and one or more chemical agents have not yet been addressed in any substantive way. This article reviews the current understanding of the health risks arising from mixed exposures to ionizing radiation and specific chemicals. Specifically discussed is how mixed radiation/chemical exposures, when evaluated in aggregation, were linked to chronic health endpoints such as cancer and intermediate health outcomes such as chromosomal aberrations. Also considered is the extent to which the current practices are consistent with the scientific understanding of the health risks associated with mixed-agent exposures. From this the discussion moves to the research needs for assessing the cumulative health risks from aggregate exposures to ionizing radiation and chemicals. The evaluation indicates that essentially no guidance has been provided for conducting risk assessment for two agents with different mechanisms of action (i.e., energy deposition from ionizing radiation versus DNA interactions with chemicals) but similar biological endpoints (i.e., chromosomal aberrations, mutations, and cancer). The literature review also reveals the problems caused by the absence of both the basic science and an appropriate evaluation framework for the combined effects of mixed-agent exposures. This makes it difficult to determine whether there is truly no interaction or somehow the interaction is masked by the scale of effect observation or inappropriate dose-response assumptions.