Search

Since the inception of Section 5 (Premanufacturing/Premarketing Notification, PMN) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), structure-activity relationship (SAR) analysis has been effectively used by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Structure Activity Team (SAT) in the assessment of potential carcinogenic hazard of new chemicals for which test data are not available. To capture, systematize and codify the Agency's predictive expertise in order to make it more widely available to assessors outside the TSCA program, a cooperative project was initiated to develop a knowledge rule-based expert system to mimic the thinking and reasoning of the SAT. In this communication, we describe the overall structure of this expert system, discuss the scientific bases and principles of SAR analysis of chemical carcinogens used in the development of SAR knowledge rules, and delineate the major factors/rules useful for assessing the carcinogenic potential of fibers, polymers, metals/metalloids and several major classes of organic chemicals. An integrative approach using available short-term predictive tests and non-cancer toxicological data to supplement SAR analysis has also been described.

A CASE SAR analysis was performed on a selected database of PAHs to investigate the possible use of the CASE method as an aid for preliminary assessment of carcinogenic potential of untested environmental PAHs. A data set, denoted LEARN, consisting of 78 PAHs and their experimental carcinogenicities was used to 'train' the CASE method and derive the CASE fragments. 8 activating fragments and 4 inactivating fragments were identified. These fragments predicted the activities of 94% of the LEARN set correctly. The biological significance of several of these fragments are rationalized in light of the current theories of PAH carcinogenesis. Using these fragments, the potential activities of a database of 106, mostly untested PAHs, denoted TEST, were predicted. These were compared to 'expert judgement' predictions based on mechanistic considerations in order to evaluate the extent of concordance between these two methods and their respective strengths and weaknesses. Initial poor agreement (64%) was attributed to limitations of the LEARN database involving inadequate representation of 2- and 3-ring PAH subclasses. When these subclasses were excluded from the TEST database, the concordance improved to 90%. The CASE fragments were also used to predict the activities of a database of 24 PAHs, denoted VALIDATE (not included in the LEARN set) for which carcinogenicity data were available. The total prediction accuracy of 75% (89% of the actives correctly identified), despite the structural diversity of the VALIDATE set, provided independent evidence of the utility of the present CASE results. A close examination of the CASE incorrect predictions was conducted to delineate inadequancies of these CASE results in order to provide cautionary guidance for future application of the method. Finally, the present results were compared to the results of a previous CASE analysis based on a more limited PAH data set, and were found to be of greater general utility. It is concluded that the CASE fragments derived in the current study should provide a useful tool for assisting and complementing 'expert judgement' in the preliminary screening of PAHs for carcinogenic activity.

The acute toxicity of p-dioxane may be enhanced up to 1000-fold by chlorination of the compound. The effect was stereoselective. Of the stereoisomers tested, tetrachloro-p-dioxane, isomer I (2r, 3t, 5t, 6c) was over 80 times more toxic than isomer II (2r, 3c, 5t, 6t). The latter compound was also a potent repressor of hepatic dimethylnitrosamine-demethylase I (DMN-d) and aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase (AHH).

In vivo administration to rats of the mixed-function oxidase modifiers 3-methylcholanthrene (MC), pregnenolone-16 alpha-carbonitrile (PCN) or beta-naphthoflavnoe (beta-f) inhibits the hepatic microsome-catalyzed in vitro binding of dimethylnitrosamine (DMN) to DNA. This parallels their effect on DMN-demethylase I, regarded to be the sole activating step in DMN carcinogenesis and fails to account for the previously observed anomaly that MC and PCN inhibit, while beta-NF enhances, the hepatocarcinogenic activity of DMN. The in vitro binding of DMN is clearly dependent on microsomes and NADPH, and is strongly enhanced by soluble cytoplasmic proteins; the presence of the latter has no effect. however, on the relative response to pretreatment by the modifiers. In mice beta-NF enhances and PCN inhibits DMN-demethylase I; beta-NF has no effect on either the cytochrome P-450 level or on the LD50, while PCN strongly increases the cytochrome P-450 level but without influencing the LD50. Neither of the two modifiers has any effect in mice on the host-mediated mutagenicity of DMN in a dose-response study, except for the highest dose of DMN (200 mg/kg) where PCN pretreatment significantly enhanced mutagenicity. To account for the anomalous observations, other potential pathways of DMN metabolism have been explored. Whole rat liver nuclei or isolated nuclear membrane fractions contain no DMN-demethylase or diethylnitrosamine-deethylase activity. In a microsomal mixed-function amine-oxidase assay system neither purified enzyme preparations nor whole microsomes catalyze NADPH oxidation in the presence of DMN as substrate. In addition, the purified enzyme does not catalyze formaldehyde production in the DMN-demethylase assay system. Benzylamine, a typical inhibitor of mitochondrial monoamine oxidase (MAO), is a potent inhibitor of DMN-demethylase activity, but microsomes are devoid of MAO activity. Furthermore, purified MAO has no DMN-demethylase activity. The differential effect of modifiers on the carcinogenicity of DMN probably involves pathways other than DMN metabolism.