Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are exogenous chemicals that interfere with hormone action, thereby increasing the risk of adverse health outcomes, including cancer, reproductive impairment, ...cognitive deficits and obesity. A complex literature of mechanistic studies provides evidence on the hazards of EDC exposure, yet there is no widely accepted systematic method to integrate these data to help identify EDC hazards. Inspired by work to improve hazard identification of carcinogens using key characteristics (KCs), we have developed ten KCs of EDCs based on our knowledge of hormone actions and EDC effects. In this Expert Consensus Statement, we describe the logic by which these KCs are identified and the assays that could be used to assess several of these KCs. We reflect on how these ten KCs can be used to identify, organize and utilize mechanistic data when evaluating chemicals as EDCs, and we use diethylstilbestrol, bisphenol A and perchlorate as examples to illustrate this approach.
A recent review by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) updated the assessments of the > 100 agents classified as Group 1, carcinogenic to humans (IARC Monographs Volume 100, parts ...A-F). This exercise was complicated by the absence of a broadly accepted, systematic method for evaluating mechanistic data to support conclusions regarding human hazard from exposure to carcinogens.
IARC therefore convened two workshops in which an international Working Group of experts identified 10 key characteristics, one or more of which are commonly exhibited by established human carcinogens.
These characteristics provide the basis for an objective approach to identifying and organizing results from pertinent mechanistic studies. The 10 characteristics are the abilities of an agent to 1) act as an electrophile either directly or after metabolic activation; 2) be genotoxic; 3) alter DNA repair or cause genomic instability; 4) induce epigenetic alterations; 5) induce oxidative stress; 6) induce chronic inflammation; 7) be immunosuppressive; 8) modulate receptor-mediated effects; 9) cause immortalization; and 10) alter cell proliferation, cell death, or nutrient supply.
We describe the use of the 10 key characteristics to conduct a systematic literature search focused on relevant end points and construct a graphical representation of the identified mechanistic information. Next, we use benzene and polychlorinated biphenyls as examples to illustrate how this approach may work in practice. The approach described is similar in many respects to those currently being implemented by the U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System Program and the U.S. National Toxicology Program.
Smith MT, Guyton KZ, Gibbons CF, Fritz JM, Portier CJ, Rusyn I, DeMarini DM, Caldwell JC, Kavlock RJ, Lambert P, Hecht SS, Bucher JR, Stewart BW, Baan R, Cogliano VJ, Straif K. 2016. Key characteristics of carcinogens as a basis for organizing data on mechanisms of carcinogenesis. Environ Health Perspect 124:713-721; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1509912.
The concept of chemical agents having properties that confer potential hazard called key characteristics (KCs) was first developed to identify carcinogenic hazards. Identification of KCs of ...cardiovascular (CV) toxicants could facilitate the systematic assessment of CV hazards and understanding of assay and data gaps associated with current approaches.
We sought to develop a consensus-based synthesis of scientific evidence on the KCs of chemical and nonchemical agents known to cause CV toxicity along with methods to measure them.
An expert working group was convened to discuss mechanisms associated with CV toxicity.
The group identified 12 KCs of CV toxicants, defined as exogenous agents that adversely interfere with function of the CV system. The KCs were organized into those primarily affecting cardiac tissue (numbers 1-4 below), the vascular system (5-7), or both (8-12), as follows: 1) impairs regulation of cardiac excitability, 2) impairs cardiac contractility and relaxation, 3) induces cardiomyocyte injury and death, 4) induces proliferation of valve stroma, 5) impacts endothelial and vascular function, 6) alters hemostasis, 7) causes dyslipidemia, 8) impairs mitochondrial function, 9) modifies autonomic nervous system activity, 10) induces oxidative stress, 11) causes inflammation, and 12) alters hormone signaling.
These 12 KCs can be used to help identify pharmaceuticals and environmental pollutants as CV toxicants, as well as to better understand the mechanistic underpinnings of their toxicity. For example, evidence exists that fine particulate matter PM
in aerodynamic diameter (
) air pollution, arsenic, anthracycline drugs, and other exogenous chemicals possess one or more of the described KCs. In conclusion, the KCs could be used to identify potential CV toxicants and to define a set of test methods to evaluate CV toxicity in a more comprehensive and standardized manner than current approaches. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9321.
The ten key characteristics (KCs) of carcinogens are based on characteristics of known human carcinogens and encompass many types of endpoints. We propose that an objective review of the large amount ...of cancer mechanistic evidence for the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) can be achieved through use of these KCs. A search on metabolic and mechanistic data relevant to the carcinogenicity of BPA was conducted and web-based software tools were used to screen and organize the results. We applied the KCs to systematically identify, organize, and summarize mechanistic information for BPA, and to bring relevant carcinogenic mechanisms into focus. For some KCs with very large data sets, we utilized reviews focused on specific endpoints. Over 3000 studies for BPA from various data streams (exposed humans, animals, in vitro and cell-free systems) were identified. Mechanistic data relevant to each of the ten KCs were identified, with receptor-mediated effects, epigenetic alterations, oxidative stress, and cell proliferation being especially data rich. Reactive and bioactive metabolites are also associated with a number of KCs. This review demonstrates how the KCs can be applied to evaluate mechanistic data, especially for data-rich chemicals. While individual entities may have different approaches for the incorporation of mechanistic data in cancer hazard identification, the KCs provide a practical framework for conducting an objective examination of the available mechanistic data without a priori assumptions on mode of action. This analysis of the mechanistic data available for BPA suggests multiple and inter-connected mechanisms through which this chemical can act.
Since the inception of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in the early 1970s, the IARC Monographs Programme has evaluated more than 1000 agents with respect to carcinogenic ...hazard; of these, up to and including Volume 119 of the IARC Monographs, 120 agents met the criteria for classification as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1). Volume 100 of the IARC Monographs provided a review and update of Group 1 carcinogens. These agents were divided into six broad categories: (I) pharmaceuticals; (II) biological agents; (III) arsenic, metals, fibers, and dusts; (IV) radiation; (V) personal habits and indoor combustions; and (VI) chemical agents and related occupations. Data on biological mechanisms of action (MOA) were extracted from the Monographs to assemble a database on the basis of ten key characteristics attributed to human carcinogens. After some grouping of similar agents, the characteristic profiles were examined for 86 Group 1 agents for which mechanistic information was available in the IARC Monographs up to and including Volume 106, based upon data derived from human in vivo, human in vitro, animal in vivo, and animal in vitro studies. The most prevalent key characteristic was "is genotoxic", followed by "alters cell proliferation, cell death, or nutrient supply" and "induces oxidative stress". Most agents exhibited several of the ten key characteristics, with an average of four characteristics per agent, a finding consistent with the notion that cancer development in humans involves multiple pathways. Information on the key characteristics was often available from multiple sources, with many agents demonstrating concordance between human and animal sources, particularly with respect to genotoxicity. Although a detailed comparison of the characteristics of different types of agents was not attempted here, the overall characteristic profiles for pharmaceutical agents and for chemical agents and related occupations appeared similar. Further in-depth analyses of this rich database of characteristics of human carcinogens are expected to provide additional insights into the MOA of human cancer development.
Objectives: There are some common occupational agents and exposure circumstances for which evidence of carcinogenicity is substantial but not yet conclusive for humans. Our objectives were to ...identify research gaps and needs for 20 agents prioritized for review based on evidence of widespread human exposures and potential carcinogenicity in animals or humans. Data sources: For each chemical agent (or category of agents), a systematic review was conducted of new data published since the most recent pertinent International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monograph meeting on that agent. Data extraction: Reviewers were charged with identifying data gaps and general and specific approaches to address them, focusing on research that would be important in resolving classification uncertainties. An expert meeting brought reviewers together to discuss each agent and the identified data gaps and approaches. Data synthesis: Several overarching issues were identified that pertained to multiple agents; these included the importance of recognizing that carcinogenic agents can act through multiple toxicity pathways and mechanisms, including epigenetic mechanisms, oxidative stress, and immuno- and hormonal modulation. Conclusions: Studies in occupational populations provide important opportunities to understand the mechanisms through which exogenous agents cause cancer and intervene to prevent human exposure and/or prevent or detect cancer among those already exposed. Scientific developments are likely to increase the challenges and complexities of carcinogen testing and evaluation in the future, and epidemiologic studies will be particularly critical to inform carcinogen classification and risk assessment processes.
Since the inception of the IARC Monographs Programme in the early 1970s, this Programme has developed 119 Monograph Volumes on more than 1000 agents for which there exists some evidence of cancer ...risk to humans. Of these, 120 agents were found to meet the criteria for classification as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1). Volume 100 of the IARC Monographs, compiled in 2008-2009 and published in 2012, provided a review and update of the 107 Group 1 agents identified as of 2009. These agents were divided into six broad categories: (I) pharmaceuticals; (II) biological agents; (III) arsenic, metals, fibers and dusts; (IV) radiation; (V) personal habits and indoor combustions; and (VI) chemical agents and related occupations. The Group I agents reviewed in Volume 100, as well as five additional Group 1 agents defined in subsequent Volumes of the Monographs, were used to assess the degree of concordance between sites where tumors originate in humans and experimental animals including mice, rats, hamsters, dogs, and non-human primates using an anatomically based tumor nomenclature system, representing 39 tumor sites and 14 organ and tissue systems. This evaluation identified 91 Group 1 agents with sufficient evidence (82 agents) or limited evidence (9 agents) of carcinogenicity in animals. The most common tumors observed in both humans and animals were those of the respiratory system including larynx, lung, and lower respiratory tract. In humans, respiratory system tumors were noted for 31 of the 111 distinct Group 1 carcinogens identified up to and including Volume 109 of the IARC Monographs, comprising predominantly 14 chemical agents and related occupations in category VI; seven arsenic, metals, fibers, and dusts in category III, and five personal habits and indoor combustions in category V. Subsequent to respiratory system tumors, those in lymphoid and hematopoietic tissues (26 agents), the urothelium (18 agents), and the upper aerodigestive tract (16 agents) were most often seen in humans, while tumors in digestive organs (19 agents), skin (18 agents), and connective tissues (17 agents) were frequently seen in animals. Exposures to radiation, particularly X- and γ-radiation, and tobacco smoke were associated with tumors at multiple sites in humans. Although the IARC Monographs did not emphasize tumor site concordance between animals and humans, substantial concordance was detected for several organ and tissue systems, even under the stringent criteria for sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity used by IARC. Of the 60 agents for which at least one tumor site was identified in both humans and animals, 52 (87%) exhibited tumors in at least one of the same organ and tissue systems in humans and animals. It should be noted that some caution is needed in interpreting concordance at sites where sample size is particularly small. Although perfect (100%) concordance was noted for agents that induce tumors of the mesothelium, only two Group 1 agents that met the criteria for inclusion in the concordance analysis caused tumors at this site. Although the present analysis demonstrates good concordance between animals and humans for many, but not all, tumor sites, limitations of available data may result in underestimation of concordance.
While scientific knowledge of the potential health significance of chemical exposures has grown, experimental methods for predicting the carcinogenicity of environmental agents have not been ...substantially updated in the last two decades. Current methodologies focus first on identifying genotoxicants under the premise that agents capable of directly damaging DNA are most likely to be carcinogenic to humans. Emphasis on the distinction between genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens is also motivated by assumed implications for the dose–response curve; it is purported that genotoxicants would lack a threshold in the low dose region, in contrast to non-genotoxic agents. However, for the vast majority of carcinogens, little if any empirical data exist to clarify the nature of the cancer dose–response relationship at low doses in the exposed human population. Recent advances in scientific understanding of cancer biology—and increased appreciation of the multiple impacts of carcinogens on this disease process—support the view that environmental chemicals can act through multiple toxicity pathways, modes and/or mechanisms of action to induce cancer and other adverse health outcomes. Moreover, the relationship between dose and a particular outcome in an individual could take multiple forms depending on genetic background, target tissue, internal dose and other factors besides mechanisms or modes of action; inter-individual variability and susceptibility in response are, in turn, key determinants of the population dose–response curve. New bioanalytical approaches (e.g., transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics) applied in human, animal and in vitro studies could better characterize a wider array of hazard traits and improve the ability to predict the potential carcinogenicity of chemicals.
We propose guidelines to evaluate the cumulative evidence of gene-environment (G × E) interactions in the causation of human cancer. Our approach has its roots in the HuGENet and IARC Monographs ...evaluation processes for genetic and environmental risk factors, respectively, and can be applied to common chronic diseases other than cancer. We first review issues of definitions of G × E interactions, discovery and modelling methods for G × E interactions, and issues in systematic reviews of evidence for G × E interactions, since these form the foundation for appraising the credibility of evidence in this contentious field. We then propose guidelines that include four steps: (i) score the strength of the evidence for main effects of the (a) environmental exposure and (b) genetic variant; (ii) establish a prior score category and decide on the pattern of interaction to be expected; (iii) score the strength of the evidence for interaction between the environmental exposure and the genetic variant; and (iv) examine the overall plausibility of interaction by combining the prior score and the strength of the evidence and interpret results. We finally apply the scheme to the interaction between NAT2 polymorphism and tobacco smoking in determining bladder cancer risk.
PDF
