Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by PORTIER, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by EDLER, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by PORTIER, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by EDLER, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1990 Oxford University Press

other

Two-Stage Models of Carcinogenesis, Classification of Agents, and Design of Experiments

CHRISTOPHER J. PORTIER* and LUTZ EDLER{dagger}

*Stalislics and Biomathematics Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 {dagger}Department of Biostalistics, German Cancer Research Center 6900 Heidelberg, Federal Republic of Germany

Received March 9, 1989; accepted November 13, 1989

Two-Stage Models of Carcinogenesis, Gassification of Agents, and Design of Experiments. PORTIER, C. J., AND EDLER, L. (1990). Fundam. Appl. Toxicol, 14, 444–460. The implications of a clonal two-stage model of carcinogenesis on the design and analysis of 2-year In vivo tumori-genesis experiments are addressed. Using a simple classification scheme for labelling test agents as initiators, promoters, and completers, it is shown that the standard experimental design has very little ability to differentiate between these different modes of action. Even when chemicals in one class (e.g., promoters) follow a highly nonlinear dose-response relationship and chemicals in another class (e.g., initiators) follow a linear dose-response relationship, it is difficult to reject one mode of action versus the other. A simple modification of the design using age-dependent dosing schemes produces patterns of tumor incidence which are unique to the particular class, making it slightly easier to differentiate between the assumed mechanisms of action. The implications of this finding on Study design are discussed.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.