Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (32)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Waddell, W. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Waddell, W. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Toxicological Sciences 68, 275-279 (2002)
Copyright © 2002 by the Society of Toxicology


FORUM

Thresholds of Carcinogenicity of Flavors

William J. Waddell,1

Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292

Fifteen compounds approved by the FEMA (Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association) expert panel as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) and structurally related compounds have been reported to be carcinogenic in rodent studies. The dose response of the 15 compounds in these studies was scrutinized by attempting to plot the percentage of animals with tumors against the dose of the compound on a logarithmic scale in molecules of compound per kg per day (the Rozman scale). Four compounds had either no or an inverse dose response: benzaldehyde, furfural, 3,4-dihydroxycoumarin, and {gamma}-buterolactone. Three had a response at one dose only: anethole, estragole (2 studies), and isophorone. Obviously, a dose-response curve could not be generated for these 7 compounds. Four compounds had an increasing response at two doses (benzyl acetate, cinnamyl anthranilate, ethyl acrylate, and estragole); three compounds had increasing responses at three doses (citral, 2,4-hexadienal, and pyridine); one compound had increasing responses at four doses (methyl eugenol). The three compounds with three doses fit a linear plot with a correlation coefficient of at least 0.9; the four doses in male rats of methyl eugenol fit a linear plot with a correlation coefficient of 0.999983. The intercept at zero percentage tumors of these linear fits was at least several orders of magnitude greater than the estimated daily dose of these flavoring agents to individuals in the United States. This is interpreted to indicate that these flavoring agents have a clear threshold for carcinogenicity in animals that is well above the levels currently approved for use in foods; consequently, these animal studies should not be a cause for concern for carcinogenicity of these compounds in humans. Rather, the animal studies should be viewed as providing evidence for the safety of these compounds at current levels of human exposure.

Key Words: threshold; carcinogenicity; flavors; foods; FEMA; GRAS; methyleugenol.


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
L. Xia, L. Jaafar, A. Cashikar, and H. Flores-Rozas
Identification of Genes Required for Protection from Doxorubicin by a Genome-Wide Screen in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Cancer Res., December 1, 2007; 67(23): 11411 - 11418.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
W J Waddell
Critique of dose response in carcinogenesis
Human and Experimental Toxicology, July 1, 2006; 25(7): 413 - 436.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
W. J Waddell
Comparisons of thresholds for carcinogenicity on linear and logarithmic dosage scales
Human and Experimental Toxicology, June 1, 2005; 24(6): 325 - 332.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
W. J. Waddell
TO THE EDITOR
Toxicol. Sci., June 1, 2005; 85(2): 1064 - 1065.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
O. Thulesius and W. J Waddell
Human exposures to acrylamide are below the threshold for carcinogenesis
Human and Experimental Toxicology, July 1, 2004; 23(7): 357 - 358.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
W. J. Waddell, N. H. Crooks, and P. L. Carmichael
Correlation of Tumors with DNA Adducts from Methyl Eugenol and Tamoxifen in Rats
Toxicol. Sci., May 1, 2004; 79(1): 38 - 40.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol PatholHome page
J. K. Haseman
Response to Waddell & Rozman
Toxicol Pathol, October 1, 2003; 31(6): 715 - 716.
[PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
W. K. Lutz
Letter
Toxicol. Sci., September 1, 2003; 75(1): 223 - 223.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol PatholHome page
J.K. Haseman
An Alternative Perspective: A Critical Evaluation of the Waddell Threshold Extrapolation Model in Chemical Carcinogenesis
Toxicol Pathol, August 1, 2003; 31(5): 468 - 470.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
W. J. Waddell
Reply
Toxicol. Sci., August 1, 2003; 74(2): 485 - 486.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol PatholHome page
W. J. Waddell
Thresholds in Chemical Carcinogenesis: What Are Animal Experiments Telling Us?
Toxicol Pathol, April 1, 2003; 31(3): 260 - 262.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol PatholHome page
B. M. Wagner
Food Additives and Cancer: Banging the Drum
Toxicol Pathol, April 1, 2003; 31(3): 348 - 349.
[PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
W. J. Waddell
Thresholds of Carcinogenicity in the ED01 Study
Toxicol. Sci., March 1, 2003; 72(1): 158 - 163.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



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.