IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v18y1998i3p299-308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimates of the Number of Liver Carcinogens in Bioassays Conducted by the National Toxicology Program

Author

Listed:
  • Kenny S. Crump
  • D. Krewski
  • Y. Wang

Abstract

Estimates were made of the numbers of liver carcinogens in 390 long‐term bioassays conducted by the National Toxicology Program (NTP). These estimates were obtained from examination of the global pattern of p‐values obtained from statistical tests applied to individual bioassays. Representative estimates of the number of liver carcinogens (90% confidence interval in parentheses) obtained in our analysis compared to NTP's determination are as follows: female rats—49 (23, 76), NTP = 30; male rats—88 (59, 116), NTP = 35; female mice—131 (105, 157), NTP = 81; male mice—100 (73, 126), NTP = 61; overall—166 (135, 197), NTP = 108. The estimator from which these estimates were obtained is biased low by an unknown amount. Consequently, this study provides persuasive evidence of the existence of more rodent liver carcinogens than were identified by the NTP.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenny S. Crump & D. Krewski & Y. Wang, 1998. "Estimates of the Number of Liver Carcinogens in Bioassays Conducted by the National Toxicology Program," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 299-308, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:18:y:1998:i:3:p:299-308
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01297.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01297.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01297.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gregg E. Dinse & S. W. Lagakos, 1983. "Regression Analysis of Tumour Prevalence Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 32(3), pages 236-248, November.
    2. J. K. Haseman & M. R. Elwell, 1996. "Evaluation of False Positive and False Negative Outcomes in NTP Long‐Term Rodent Carcinogenicity Studies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(6), pages 813-820, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. A. John Bailer & Walter W. Piegorsch, 2000. "From Quantal Counts to Mechanisms and Systems: The Past, Present, and Future of Biometrics in Environmental Toxicology," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 327-336, June.
    2. Li, Shuwei & Hu, Tao & Wang, Peijie & Sun, Jianguo, 2017. "Regression analysis of current status data in the presence of dependent censoring with applications to tumorigenicity experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 75-86.
    3. Shanshan Lu & Jingjing Wu & Xuewen Lu, 2019. "Efficient estimation of the varying-coefficient partially linear proportional odds model with current status data," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 82(2), pages 173-194, March.
    4. Hao Liu & Jing Qin, 2018. "Semiparametric probit models with univariate and bivariate current†status data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 68-76, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:18:y:1998:i:3:p:299-308. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.