Addressing concerns about cancer-causing substances, we propose a nuanced cancer classification scheme that considers both the mode of action and potency of substances. This approach provides more detailed guidance for the regulation and management of potentially carcinogenic substances, moving beyond oversimplified binary categorizations. The assessment of carcinogenic potential is evolving, with a shift from traditional long-term rodent bioassays to New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) that incorporate in vitro and in vivo studies. There is also a growing emphasis on limiting or prohibiting certain chemicals based on potential hazards. The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) concept is applied to construct a comprehensive model for carcinogenesis, offering a unified framework to categorize various biological effects associated with cancer development and a systematic understanding of intricate pathways and mechanisms involved in carcinogenesis.
The process commences with mutations occurring in a stem cell during cell division, a common event in the cellular life cycle.
The occurrence of this event is highly frequent, with an estimated production of 2 × 10^8 cells carrying mutations capable of leading to cancer throughout a human lifetime.
Despite the high mutation rate, a majority of these mutated cells either do not survive or fail to complete the tumorigenesis process.
Number of stem cell divisions per unit of time.
Rate of mutation per cell division, contributing to the emergence of cancer-associated mutations
Rate at which cancer-capable cells survive and progress, eventually evolving into a full-fledged cancer.
Chemicals may impact carcinogenesis by altering tumor incidence rates. The inclusion of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in carcinogenicity assessments moves away from binary classifications based on evidence strength from traditional methods. Current schemes lack consideration for chemical dose-response and relative potency. Given the time and cost constraints of traditional approaches like epidemiology and long-term rodent bioassays (LTRB), there's a shift towards alternative evidence sources, including in silico assessments, in vitro studies, and short-term in vivo studies. The challenge is to devise effective methodologies for interpreting and integrating these diverse lines of evidence into a comprehensive assessment of carcinogenic potential.