Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Carcinogen classification systems: similarities and differences

T Sanner1, E Dybing, D Kroese

  • 1Laboratory for Environmental and Occupational Cancer, Institute of Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology : RTP
|April 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Adverse outcome pathways: opportunities, limitations and open questions.

Archives of toxicology·2017
Same author

Risk assessment of coumarin using the bench mark dose (BMD) approach: children in Norway which regularly eat oatmeal porridge with cinnamon may exceed the TDI for coumarin with several folds.

Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2011
Same author

Effect of protein kinase C inhibitors on TPA-induced inhibition of gap junctional intercellular communication and induction of transformed morphology in Syrian hamster embryo cells.

Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA·2010
Same author

The scientific basis of tobacco product regulation.

World Health Organization technical report series·2009
Same author

Risk assessment of dietary exposures to compounds that are genotoxic and carcinogenic--an overview.

Toxicology letters·2008
Same author

Mandated lowering of toxicants in cigarette smoke: a description of the World Health Organization TobReg proposal.

Tobacco control·2008

Regulatory classification systems for carcinogens in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries were reviewed. While classification methods vary, the identified carcinogens and labeling requirements show significant similarities across nations.

Area of Science:

  • Environmental Health Sciences
  • Toxicology
  • Regulatory Science

Background:

  • Carcinogen classification is crucial for public health and regulatory policies.
  • Diverse regulatory approaches exist globally for identifying and managing carcinogens.
  • The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) comprises countries with varying legislative frameworks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide an overview of carcinogen regulatory classification systems in OECD countries.
  • To compare different classification methodologies and their outcomes.
  • To identify commonalities and differences in hazard labeling and restrictions.

Main Methods:

  • A questionnaire-based study was conducted among OECD member countries.
  • Data on existing legislation, classification systems, and lists of carcinogens were collected.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Information on hazard labeling, risk phrases, and sales/use restrictions was analyzed.

    • Main Results:

    • Most OECD countries have implemented legislation for carcinogen classification and lists.
    • Two primary classification systems exist: weight-of-evidence and potency-based.
    • Despite differing systems, the substances classified as carcinogens are largely consistent.
    • Hazard labeling and risk phrases show similarities but also notable differences.
    • Several countries impose restrictions on the sale and/or use of carcinogens.

    Conclusions:

    • Carcinogen classification systems in OECD countries, while diverse, yield largely similar results.
    • Harmonization in hazard communication (labeling) is evident but requires attention to specific differences.
    • There is an emerging trend towards incorporating mechanistic data into carcinogen classification.
    • Regulatory oversight of carcinogens involves classification, labeling, and use restrictions.