Download - Histopath of carcinogenesis
![Page 2: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline
• Overview of carcinogenesis• Lexicon of neoplasia (speaking the language)• Basics of carcinogenesis• Identifying & predicting potential carcinogens• Interpreting tumor bioassay data
![Page 3: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Overview of Carcinogenesis
• Complex disease with multiple causes• Influenced by multiple intrinsic and
extrinsic factors• Multistep progressive process at the
genetic and phenotypic level
![Page 4: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Overview of Carcinogenesis
![Page 5: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Lexicon of Carcinogenesis• Neoplasia (neoplasm, tumor, cancer)• Hyperplasia
– Physiological– Pathological
• Metaplasia• Anaplasia
– Differentiation• Dysplasia
![Page 6: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Neoplasia“….abnormal mass of tissue, the growth of which exceeds and is uncoordinated with that of normal tissue and persists in the same excessive manner after cessation of the stimuli which evoked the change” Willis 1952.
![Page 7: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Hyperplasia = increase in number of cells in an organ or tissue
• Increased volume of the organ or tissue• Usually associated with hypertrophy
e.g., hormone-induced uterine hyperplasia(increase in number of smooth muscle andepithelial cells and increased size of these cells)
![Page 8: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Two categories of hyperplasiaPhysiological hyperplasia
Hormonal – mammary gland proliferation at pubertyCompensatory – myth of Prometheus
Pathological hyperplasiaExcessive (potentially reversible) hormonal stimulationExcessive (but controlled) growth factor stimulation
![Page 9: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Two categories of hyperplasiaPhysiological hyperplasia
Hormonal – mammary gland proliferation at pubertyCompensatory – myth of Prometheus
![Page 10: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Two categories of hyperplasiaPhysiological hyperplasia
Hormonal – mammary gland proliferation at pubertyCompensatory – myth of Prometheus
![Page 11: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Pathological hyperplasiaExcessive (potentially reversible) hormonal stimulationExcessive (but controlled) growth factor stimulationMay be associated with concurrent toxicity
![Page 12: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Mechanisms of physiological hyperplasiaIncreased local growth factors and/or receptorsActivation of intracellular signaling pathways
Transcription factors turn on specific genesCell cycle genes~70 other genes
![Page 13: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Proliferation of existing cells and also stem cells
Hepatectomy – paracrine stimulation from cytokines &polypeptide growth factors
![Page 14: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Mechanisms of pathological hyperplasia
Exaggerated response to growth factors and hormonal stimulation
Hormone imbalance – excessive androgens & benignprostatic hyperplasia
Wound healing – a specific form of hyperplasia whereparenchymal cells are replaced by scar tissue
Viral infections – papilloma virus-induced growth factors leadingto skin warts and mucosal epithelial hyperplasias
Chronic hepatitis – stem cells proliferate since the capacity ofhepatocytes to proliferate is compromised
![Page 15: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Metaplasia – one mature adult cell type replaced by another mature adult cell type
Adaptive process – more sensitive cells replaced by cells less sensitive cells to an adverse
environmentFrequently – columnar to squamous (epithelial cells)
Cigarette smokeVitamin A deficiencyLoss of mucus secretion and mucociliar escalator function
Mesenchymal metaplasia – connective tissue osseous tissue
If stimulus persists – malignant transformation of the
metaplastic cells can occur
![Page 16: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
![Page 17: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
![Page 20: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
![Page 21: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
![Page 22: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Mechanisms of metaplasiaDifferentiation of stem cells along a new pathwayCytokines, growth factors, and extracellular matrix components
induce transcription factors that trigger phenotypic-specific genes
Vitamin A affects differentiation pathways of stem cellsSome cytostatic drugs disrupt DNA methylation with potential
to lead to metaplasia
6-MercaptopurineMethotrexateDacarbazineProcarbazineCarbopltin
![Page 23: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Differentiation and Anaplasia
• Differentiation in neoplasia refers to morphological and functional similarity to normal• Anaplasia is lack of differentiation• Benign tumors are typically well-differentiated• Malignant tumors range from differentiated to anaplastic with at least some loss of differentiation present• Anaplasia is a hallmark of malignancy• Anaplasia = “to form backward”
“reverse differentiation” vs.
stem cell theory of carcinogenesis
![Page 24: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Morphological aspects of anaplasia
• Pleomorphism = variation in size and shape• Abnormal nuclear morphology
• Hyperchromatism• Karyomegaly• Large nucleoli
• Mitoses tend to be increased in malignancy• Giant cells and multinucleated cells
![Page 25: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Another example of multinucleated giant hepatocytes.Chronic exposure to chlordane in a mouse.
![Page 26: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Dysplasia = disordered growthPrimarily an epithelial changeConstellation of changes
Loss of polarityLoss of uniformityPleomorphismNuclear abnormalities
Normal forestomach
Forestomachdysplasia
If marked and involves the entire thickness of the epithelium but is confined there = carcinoma in situ
![Page 27: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Normal Mouse Trachea
![Page 28: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Normal mouse trachea
![Page 29: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
90-Day Formaldehyde Inhalation Study in Mice
![Page 30: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
90-Day Formaldehyde Inhalation Study in Mice
![Page 31: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
90-Day Formaldehyde Inhalation Study in Mice
![Page 32: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
![Page 33: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
90-Day Formaldehyde Inhalation Study in Mice
![Page 34: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
90-Day Formaldehyde Inhalation Study in Mice
![Page 35: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
![Page 36: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Neoplasia = “….abnormal mass of tissue, the growth of which exceeds and is uncoordinated with that of normal tissue and persists in the same excessive manner after cessation of the stimuli which evoked the change” Willis 1952.
Growth RateCell production vs cell lossMalignant neoplasms grow faster than benign (oversimplified)Growth rate is not constant
HormonesAdequacy of blood supplyOther factors
Anticancer agents tend to work on fast-growing tumorsCells in proliferative phaseIf a low percentage (~5%) of the cells are in the proliferative phase = slow-growing tumor that is refractory to treatmentDebulking tumor with surgery surviving cells enter the cell cycle (leave G0) and become susceptible to anticancer agent treatment
![Page 37: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Essential alterations for malignancy Self-sufficient growth (don’t require external stimulation) Ability to synthesize growth factors Insensitive to growth inhibitory signals Evasion of apoptosis Defects in DNA repair Limitless replication – maintain telomere length and function Sustained angiogenesis Ability to invade and metastasize
Hepatocellular carcinoma Pulmonary metastases
![Page 38: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Hyperplasia
• -plasia = formation• Neoplasia - new formation• Hyperplasia – enhanced formation• Metaplasia – changed formation• Anaplasia – backward formation• Dysplasia – abnormal formation
SUMMARY
LexiconOf
Carcinogenesis
![Page 39: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Outline
• Overview of carcinogenesis• Lexicon of neoplasia (speaking the language)• Basics of carcinogenesis• Carcinogenic agents• Identifying & predicting potential human
carcinogens• Interpreting actual tumor bioassay data
![Page 40: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Basics of Carcinogenesis• Molecular factors• Morphologic factors• Modulators and modifiers
![Page 41: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
![Page 42: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 43: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 44: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
![Page 45: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Growth Factors
• Normal development– Embryogenesis
• Normal cell function– Locomotion, contractility
• Regeneration– E.g., hepatectomy
• Repair– Wound healing– Scar tissue formation
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 46: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Molecular Factors in Carcinogenesis
• Non-lethal genetic damage• Alteration of normal regulatory genes
– Growth promoting protooncogenes– Growth inhibiting cancer suppressor genes– Genes that regulate programmed cell death (apoptosis)
• Alteration of genes that regulate DNA repair• Epigenetic changes (methylation, imprinting)• Multistep cascade of events
![Page 47: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Multiple Roles of Proto-oncogenes
• Participate in functions related to cell growth and proliferation
• Encode proteins that function as:– Growth factor ligands– Growth factor receptors– Signal transducers– Transcription factors– Cell cycle components
![Page 48: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 49: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 50: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 51: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Proto-oncogene ActivationGrowth Factor (Proto-oncogene) [Mode of Action]
PDGF-β (SIS) [overexpression]FGF (HST-1; INT-2) [overexpression; amplification]TGTFa (TGFα) [overexpression]HGF (HGF) [overexpression]
Growth Factor Receptor (Proto-oncogene) [Mode of Action]EGF receptors (ERB-B1; ERB-B2) [overexpression; amplification]CSF-1 receptor (FMS) [point mutation]PDGF receptor (PDGF-R) [overexpression]Receptors for neurotrophic factors (KIT) [point mutation]
![Page 52: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Proto-oncogene ActivationSignal Transduction (Proto-oncogene) [Mode of Action]
GTP-binding (K-RAS; H-RAS; N-RAS) [point mutation]Nonreceptor tyrosine kinase (ABL) [translocation]RAS signal transduction (BRAF) [point mutation]WNT signal transduction (b-catenin) [point mutation; overexpression]
Nuclear Regulatory Proteins (Proto-oncogene) [Mode of Action]Transcriptional activators (C-MYC; N-MYC; L-MYC)
[translocation; amplification]
Cell Cycle RegulatorsCyclins (CYCLIN D) [translocation; amplification] (CYCLIN E) [overexpression]Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK4) [amplification; point mutation]
![Page 53: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Human and Animal Neoplasms Associated with Activated Oncogenes
![Page 54: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
![Page 55: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
![Page 56: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Multistage Hepatocarcinogenesis
normalfocus of altered
hepatocytes
hepatocellularadenoma
hepatocellularcarcinoma
H-rasactivation
altered Brca1
altered TGFa
CathepsinsOsteopontin
GoliathMIG
MHC class II
B-catenin
apoptosis c-foscyr61
![Page 57: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Basics of Carcinogenesis• Molecular factors• Morphologic factors• Modulators and modifiers
![Page 58: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
NORMAL
PATHOLOGICAL HYPERPLASIAAND PRENEOPLASIA
ADENOMA
CARCINOMA
![Page 59: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Thyroid hypertrophy, hyperplasia and adenoma secondary to liver enzyme induction
Normal thyroid Follicular cell hyperplasiaand hypertrophy
Follicular cell adenoma
![Page 60: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Hepatic Foci of Cellular Alteration
Eosinophilic Focus Clear Cell Focus
Basophilic Focus Mixed Cell Focus
![Page 61: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Hepatocellular Adenoma
![Page 62: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Hepatocellular Adenoma
![Page 63: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Hepatocellular Adenoma
![Page 64: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
![Page 65: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
![Page 66: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
![Page 67: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
![Page 68: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
Carcinoma arising in Adenoma
![Page 69: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
Carcinoma arising in Adenoma
![Page 70: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
Carcinoma arising in Adenoma
![Page 71: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
Hepatoblastoma arising in adenoma
![Page 72: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
Essential alterations for malignancy Self-sufficient growth (don’t require external stimulation) Ability to synthesize growth factors Insensitive to growth inhibitory signals Evasion of apoptosis Defects in DNA repair Limitless replication – maintain telomere length and function Sustained angiogenesis Ability to invade and metastasize
![Page 73: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
Progression of Proliferative Liver Lesions
Basophilic Focus Hepatocellular adenoma
Metastatic carcinoma Hepatocellular carcinoma
![Page 74: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Progression of Proliferative Forestomach Lesions
![Page 75: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 76: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
From Robbins and Cotran Pathologic BasisOf Disease, 7th Edition, 2004.
![Page 77: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
Basics of Carcinogenesis• Molecular factors• Morphologic factors• Modulators and modifiers
![Page 78: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
![Page 79: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
Modifying Factors
• Cell proliferation & apoptosis• Enzyme induction• Methylation & imprinting• Oncogenes & tumor suppressor genes• Hormones• Diet & body weight• Intercellular communication
![Page 80: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
![Page 81: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
![Page 82: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
promotioninitiation progression
![Page 83: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
![Page 84: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
![Page 85: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
Outline
• Overview of carcinogenesis• Lexicon of neoplasia (speaking the language)• Basics of carcinogenesis• Identifying & predicting potential carcinogens• Interpreting tumor bioassay data
![Page 86: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
Identifying potential carcinogens
Genotoxic vs non-genotoxic agentsRodent bioassays
History & evolutionPathology evaluation of
bioassayPeer review (previous Hardisty
presentation)Predicting carcinogenic hazard
Using toxicity study data
![Page 87: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
Carcinogenic agentsChemical carcinogensRadiant energy
UV, ionizing radiationOncogenic DNA viruses
PapillomavirusEpstein-Barr virusHepatitis B virus
Oncogenic RNA virusesHuman T-cell leukemia virus
Type 1
![Page 88: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
1700’s 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
• Bernardino Ramazzini - 1713• John Hill - 1761• Percival Pott - 1775• Elmslie -1866• Jonathon Hutchinson - 1888• Rehn - 1895
• Yamagiwa & Ichikawa - 1918• Murphy & Sturm - 1925• Cook et al. - 1932• Sasaki & Yoshida - 1935• Berenblum - 1941• Magee & Barnes - 1956
• Realization that chemicals, environmental factors, and aspects of life style cause cancer
• Concept of the cancer bioassay
![Page 89: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
1700’s 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
NCI NTP
CANCER BIOASSAY TIMELINE
![Page 90: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
![Page 91: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
![Page 92: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
![Page 93: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
1700’s 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
NCI NTP
FDA
OECD
IARC
EPA
ICH
VICH
EUROTOX
IUTOX
SOT
DST
BTS
STP
BSTPASIATOX
ESTPCANCER BIOASSAY TIMELINE
![Page 94: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
1700’s 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
NCI NTP
CANCER BIOASSAY TIMELINE
50 Male and 50 female F344 rats & B6C3F1 MiceMaximum tolerated dose & lower dosesRoutes: feed, gavage, drinking water,
inhalation, dermalTest duration of 2 yearsDiet: NIH-07 and NTP-2000Extensive histopathology & peer review
“Current” Testing Paradigm
![Page 95: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
Positive Aspects of the Bioassay• Standardized (informative databases)• Yields positive results for known human
carcinogens• Trans-species carcinogens• Identification of important variables &
modulators• Informative for chronic toxicity• Appreciation of benefits of historical controls• Reproducible• Search for alternatives
![Page 96: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/96.jpg)
Limitations of the Bioassay• Resource intensive• Inherent insensitivity for detecting weak or
moderate carcinogens• Not ideal for determining if an agent has
carcinogenic potential under actual human exposure conditions
• Single chemical exposure vs “real world”• Historical inertia• Debate regarding relevance
– Rodent-specific mechanisms– High doses
![Page 97: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/97.jpg)
Search for alternatives
1700’s 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
NCI NTP
CANCER BIOASSAY TIMELINE
• A viable alternative needs a champion
• A successful alternative needs to be validated
• An ideal alternative should be less expensive and faster than the conventional bioassay
![Page 98: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/98.jpg)
Model! Model! Who’s Got the Model?
![Page 99: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/99.jpg)
• Genotoxicity batteries• Strain A mouse• Two-stage liver model• Neonatal mouse
model• Ito medium-term
model• Genetically
engineered mouse models
• Rat mammary gland• Local subcutaneous
injection• Guppy & Medaka• Hamster cheek pouch• Structure-activity
relationships & AI• Genomics &
proteomics
Model! Model! Who’s Got the Model?
![Page 100: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/100.jpg)
Identifying potential carcinogens
Genotoxic vs non-genotoxic agentsRodent bioassays
History & evolutionPathology evaluation of
bioassayPeer review (previous Hardisty
presentation)Predicting carcinogenic hazard
Using toxicity study data
![Page 101: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/101.jpg)
Pathology Evaluation
An iterative process for identificationof subtle differences among groups
of experimental animals
![Page 102: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/102.jpg)
Defining Diagnostic Criteria• What is hyperplasia versus neoplasia in the broad
context of toxicologic pathology– There is a range of change– Diagnoses determined by training, published literature,
and experience– The greater the experience, the broader the ranges of
non-neoplastic and benignNORMAL
PATHOLOGICAL HYPERPLASIAAND PRENEOPLASIA
ADENOMA
CARCINOMA
![Page 103: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/103.jpg)
Personal Diagnostic Judgment• Inexperienced pathologists
tend to overdiagnose neoplastic changes
• Thousands of tissues later, the number of tumors diagnosed is decreased
• Result of increased familiarity with spectrum of hyperplasia and neoplasia in laboratory animals, increased confidence
![Page 104: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/104.jpg)
Drift Over Time
• Professional drift – changing criteria for a given lesion
• Personal drift – Increased familiarity with a given lesion with greater exposure
![Page 105: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/105.jpg)
Reasons for a Pathology Peer Review
• Routine peer reviews • Assure consistency in terminology and grading• Increase confidence in the study data• Ensure data meets requirements of regulatory
agencies• Confirm target tissues/lesions• Confirm NOEL
• Non-routine peer reviews• Target tissue reviews• Pathology Working Groups
![Page 106: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/106.jpg)
Identifying potential carcinogens
Genotoxic vs non-genotoxic agentsRodent bioassays
History & evolutionPathology evaluation of
bioassayPeer review (previous Hardisty
presentation)Predicting carcinogenic hazard
Using toxicity study data
![Page 107: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/107.jpg)
![Page 108: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/108.jpg)
Rodent Liver Toxicity• Cytomegaly• Hypertrophy• Necrosis• Bile duct hyperplasia• Hepatocellular degeneration (rats)
• Liver weight
Cytomegaly Hypertrophy
Necrosis Bile duct hyperplasia
DegenerationToxicologic Pathology 39: 393-401 (2004)
![Page 109: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/109.jpg)
Summary from Allen et al., 2004
Mouse• A chemical showing a positive
response for hypertrophy, cytomegaly and necrosis has a high likelihood of producing liver neoplasia
• Failed to identify more than 1/3 of the liver carcinogens
• Inclusion of increased liver weight increased sensitivity but decreased specificity of the prediction
Rat• No single lesion was a strong
predictor• Hepatocellular hypertrophy
was the strongest predictor• Bile duct hyperplasia and
hepatocellular degeneration did not contribute
• Grouping hypertrophy, cytomegaly, and necrosis correctly identified 7 of 11 liver carcinogens but doubled the number of false positives
![Page 110: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/110.jpg)
Toxicological Sciences80: 225-229 (2004)
![Page 111: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/111.jpg)
Toxicological Sciences 2005 88(1):18-23
Prediction of 2-Year Carcinogenicity Study Results for Pharmaceutical Products: How Are We Doing?
Abigail Jacobs1 Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, USFDA, 9201 Corporate Blvd, Rm N212, Rockville, Maryland 20850 Received May 4, 2005; accepted June 24, 2005
Some have proposed that 2-year carcinogenicity studies may not be necessary if the material is a direct-acting DNA mutagen, induces liver enzymes, causes hyperplasia or toxicity in particular organs, causes cell proliferation, is cytotoxic, causes hormonal perturbations, or if one has QSAR analyses or ‘omics information. Safety pharmacology data, pharmacologic activity, metabolism data, and results of 13-week dose ranging studies (with organ weight data, clinical chemistry data, hematologic data, clinical signs and histopathologic findings) were compared with results of 2-year carcinogenicity studies reviewed by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)/FDA. The experience with the ICH genetic toxicology battery and alternative carcinogenicity models was
also reviewed. It appears that the information available from short-term studies is not currently sufficient to accurately
and reliably predict the outcome of long-term carcinogenicity studies.
![Page 112: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/112.jpg)
SOT Annual MeetingSalt Lake City, UTMarch 9, 2010
Preneoplastic lesions not predictive
A completely negative12-month rat toxicity study don’t need to do a carcinogenicity study
Liver response appears generically predictive even for other target tissues
![Page 113: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/113.jpg)
• Core set of mechanistic assays– DNA adducts, repair & reactivity– DNA crosslinking– Genotoxicity– Receptor-mediated assays– Microtubule inhibition– Intercellular communication– Enzyme induction– Cell cycle perturbations– Endocrine disruption– Altered methylation– Oxidative stress; free radicals– Immunosuppression– Serum biochemistry– Genomics/proteomics– Hormone activity
• Abnormal phenotype• Toxicologic pathology
ANCHORING
• Biologically plausible
• Computational/Informatics– SAR & other alerts– Artificial intelligence– Modeling, including PBPK– Database mining– Focused epidemiology
C A N C E R
![Page 114: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/114.jpg)
The Way Forward• Search for alternatives
– Multiple inbred strains– “Humanized” mouse
• Continued “refinement and improvement” of the conventional bioassay– Stop studies– In utero and neonatal
exposures• Develop predictive strategies to
minimize the need for long term in vivo testing
• Embracing each new approach and each new promising technology– Systems biology– “Omics” and biological
pathways– Comparative genomics– Multimodality
molecular and functional imaging
– In situ molecular methods
– New biomarkers
![Page 115: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/115.jpg)
Interpreting Tumor Bioassay Data
![Page 116: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/116.jpg)
Purpose of interpreting bioassay = detect differences that may be directly or indirectly related to exposure to the test agent
![Page 117: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/117.jpg)
Considerations in Interpretation of Bioassay Data
Neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Benign vs. malignant• Latency• Multiplicity• Levels of evidence of carcinogenicity
Non-neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Adaptive vs. adverse• Severity• MTD, NOEL and NOAEL
![Page 118: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/118.jpg)
Modifying Factors
• Diet & body weight• Cell proliferation & apoptosis• Enzyme induction• Methylation & imprinting• Oncogenes & tumor suppressor genes• Hormones• Intercellular communication
![Page 119: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/119.jpg)
Dose and Dose Relationships
![Page 120: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/120.jpg)
Considerations
• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions
– Common lesions will tend to have a higher background (spontaneous) incidence
– Unique (rare) lesions typically show marginal increases compared to control
• Lumping & Splitting– Relates to how the pathologist categorizes his or her findings
• Direct vs. indirect causality– Determination if observed effect is secondary to something other
than a direct response to the test agent
![Page 121: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/121.jpg)
Considerations in Interpretation of Bioassay Data
Neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Benign vs. malignant• Latency• Multiplicity• Levels of evidence of carcinogenicity
Non-neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Adaptive vs. adverse• Severity• MTD, NOEL and NOAEL
![Page 122: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/122.jpg)
Progression of Proliferative Liver Lesions
Basophilic Focus Hepatocellular adenoma
Metastatic carcinoma Hepatocellular carcinoma
![Page 123: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/123.jpg)
Progression of Proliferative Forestomach Lesions
![Page 124: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/124.jpg)
![Page 125: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/125.jpg)
Considerations• Species/strain susceptibility
– Gallbladder adenoma/carcinoma– Hepatoblastoma– Stellate cell tumor
Hepatoblastoma Stellate cell tumor
GallbladderAdenoma
![Page 126: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/126.jpg)
LungColon
LiverSkin
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Relative Susceptibility of Inbred Mouse Strains toChemically Induced Carcinogenesis
A/J
AKR
BALB
/c
C3H
C57B
L/6
DBA/
2
P/J
SWR
Drinkwater & Bennett 1991
![Page 127: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/127.jpg)
![Page 128: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/128.jpg)
Male Mouse Liver Tumors(Spontaneous Frequency)
King-Herbert & Thayer - 2006
![Page 129: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/129.jpg)
Relative susceptibilities of selected strains to liver tumor induction
![Page 130: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/130.jpg)
Historical Control Incidences
![Page 131: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/131.jpg)
Considerations
• Neoplasia• Benign vs. malignant• Latency• Multiplicity
![Page 132: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/132.jpg)
Considerations in Interpretation of Bioassay Data
Neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Benign vs. malignant• Latency• Multiplicity• Levels of evidence of carcinogenicity
Non-neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Adaptive vs. adverse• Severity• MTD, NOEL and NOAEL
![Page 133: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/133.jpg)
NTP Levels of Evidence of Carcinogenicity• Clear evidence• Some evidence• Equivocal evidence• No evidence - no chemically related increases in
malignant or benign neoplasms• Inadequate study - because of major limitations,
cannot be interpreted as valid for showing either the presence or absence of carcinogenic activity
![Page 134: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/134.jpg)
NTP Levels of Evidence of Carcinogenic Activity
• Clear evidence (CE) - a dose related increase in: a) malignant neoplasms, b) benign and malignant neoplasms, or marked increase in benign neoplasms with ability to progress
Stomach - benign NE tumor 0 0 13** 9**Stomach - malignant NE tumor 0 1 12** 26**Combined 0 1 25** 34**
Methyleugenol - CE in female rats
N = 50
![Page 135: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/135.jpg)
Lung - A/B adenoma 5 9 10 16**Lung - A/B carcinoma 2 1 5 3 Combined 7 10 15* 19**
Some evidence (SE) - an increase of benign, malignant, or combined in which the strength of the response is less than that required for clear evidence.
Ethylbenzene - SE in male mice
NTP Levels of Evidence of Carcinogenic Activity
N = 50
![Page 136: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/136.jpg)
Lung - A/B adenoma 0 0 0 3Lung - A/B carcinoma 0 1 1 1Combined 0 1 1 4
• Equivocal evidence (EE) - a marginal increase of neoplasms that may be chemically related
Molybdenum Trioxide - EE in male rats
NTP Levels of Evidence of Carcinogenic Activity
N = 50
![Page 137: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/137.jpg)
Spectrum of Esophageal Lesions
Normal mucosa
Hyperplasia
PapillomaSquamous cell carcinoma
![Page 138: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/138.jpg)
Esophageal lesions in a two-year rat carcinogenicity study. Male Sprague-Dawley rats. Administration of compound by gavage in water. N= 50/dose. The intended route of human exposure is by oral tablet.
![Page 139: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/139.jpg)
Esophageal lesions in a two-year rat carcinogenicity study. Male Sprague-Dawley rats. Administration of compound by gavage in water. N= 60/dose. The intended route of human exposure is by oral tablet.
• Laboratory historic control = 0• No esophageal neoplasms in the females or in mice (males and females).• No forestomach tumors in the rats. No oral cavity tumors in rats. • Compound is irritating.• Esophageal inflammation in a 28-day and 6-month study at higher doses:
Control 3/10 versus High dose 8/10
Intended human exposure is by coated tablet that dissolves in the stomach.
![Page 140: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/140.jpg)
Evidence of carcinogenic activity (n=290) Liver 57 % Lung 22 % Kidney 22 % Mammary gland 14 % Hematopoeitic 13 % Forestomach 12 % Thyroid 10 % Vascular System 9 %
![Page 141: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/141.jpg)
Is There Evidence of Carcinogenicity in the Liver of Male Mice Treated with 2-Butoxyethanol?
Liver - Hepatocellular adenoma 22 18 18 17
Liver - Hepatocellular carcinoma 10 11 16 21**
Liver - combined 30 24 31 30
N = 50
![Page 142: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/142.jpg)
Is There Evidence of Carcinogenicity in the Liver of Male Mice Treated with 2-Butoxyethanol?
Liver - Hepatocellular adenoma 22 18 18 17
Liver - Hepatocellular carcinoma 10 11 16 21**
Liver - combined 30 24 31 30
Historical control range for Hepatocellular carcinoma 14 to 40%
N = 50
![Page 143: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/143.jpg)
What might explain the lack of a clear tumor responsein the high dose group?
Liver tumor response in a 2-year rodent carcinogenicity study
![Page 144: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/144.jpg)
What might explain the lack of a clear tumor responsein the high dose group?
Liver tumor response in a 2-year rodent carcinogenicity study
![Page 145: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/145.jpg)
Liver tumor response in a 2-year rodent carcinogenicity study
There was no decrease in tumor latency or multiplicity. Survival and body weight gain were similar among the 4 groups.
What could explain the statistically significant low dose response?
Is this a positive rodent carcinogen?
![Page 146: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/146.jpg)
Liver tumor response in a 2-year rodent carcinogenicity study
There was no decrease in tumor latency or multiplicity. Survival and body weight gain were similar among the 4 groups.
What could explain the statistically significant low dose response?
Is this a positive rodent carcinogen?
![Page 147: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/147.jpg)
Other types of liver tumorsHemangioma/hemangiosarcomaHistiocytic sarcomaKupffer cell sarcomaStellate cell tumorCholangiomaCholangiocarcinoma
Hemangiosarcoma
Cholangiocarcinoma Histiocytic sarcoma Stellate cell tumor
![Page 148: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/148.jpg)
Liver tumor response in a 2-year rat carcinogenicity studyN = 50
What diagnostic entities are legitimate to combine?
Would you classify this as a positive carcinogenic response?
![Page 149: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/149.jpg)
Liver tumor response in a 2-year rat carcinogenicity study
What diagnostic entities are legitimate to combine?
Would you classify this as a positive carcinogenic response?
N = 50
![Page 150: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/150.jpg)
Considerations in Interpretation of Bioassay Data
Neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Benign vs. malignant• Latency• Multiplicity• Levels of evidence of carcinogenicity
Non-neoplasia• Modifying factors• Dose relationships• Trans-sex & trans-species• Common vs. unique lesions• Lesion progression• Species/strain susceptibility• Controls• Lumping & Splitting• Direct vs. indirect causality• Adaptive vs. adverse• Severity• MTD, NOEL and NOAEL
![Page 151: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/151.jpg)
Summary• Purpose of interpreting bioassay = detect
differences that may be directly or indirectly related to exposure to the test agent– In rodent studies we are concerned with effects in a group of animals rather
than in individual animals– Dose relationships are very important– Responses are compared to the concurrent control and, in instances where
the response is questionable, comparison to historic controls may be appropriate
– It is sometimes useful to combine certain lesions to better interpret bioassay results
![Page 152: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/152.jpg)
![Page 153: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/153.jpg)
Case 3 – Malignant Lymphoma in female B6C3F1 mice
0 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1000 ppm
Incidence(percentage)
All organs – malignant lymphoma
3 (6%)
8 (16%)
11*(22%)
13**(26%)
Historical control data: mean 15.5%; range 6-32%50 animals examined per group; *p<0.05; **p<0.01
![Page 154: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/154.jpg)
Case 6 – Uterine tumors in female Wistar rats
C LD MD HDNumber examined 40 49 50 50Fibromatous Polyp 7 11 12 10Multiple Fibrous Polyps 1 1 0 2
Adenocarcinoma 6 4 5 7Papilloma 0 0 1 0Carcinoma in situ 1 0 0 1Stromal Sarcoma 0 0 0 2Poorly Diff. Sarcoma 0 0 0 1Unclassified Sarcoma 0 0 0 1
![Page 155: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/155.jpg)
Case 2 – Hemangioma in male B6C3F1 mice
Hemangioma only 0 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1000 ppm
Liver 0 1 0 0
Heart 0 0 1 0
Spleen 0 0 0 0
Subcutis 0 1 0 0
Mesentery 0 0 1 2
All Organs 0 2 2 2
![Page 156: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/156.jpg)
Case 2 – Hemangiosarcoma in male B6C3F1 mice
Hemangiosarcoma only
0 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1000 ppm
Liver 2 5 6 8
Heart 0 0 0 0
Spleen 0 2 2 1
Subcutis 1 3 1 7
Mesentery 0 3 13 7
All Organs 3 13 22 23
![Page 157: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/157.jpg)
Case 2 – Hemangioma or Hemangiosarcoma in male B6C3F1 mice
Hemangioma/HSA 0 ppm
10 ppm
100 ppm
1000 ppm
Liver 2 6 6 8*
Heart 0 0 1 0
Spleen 0 2 2 1
Subcutis 1 4 1 7*
Mesentery 0 3 14** 9**
All Organs 3 15** 24** 25**50 animals examined per group; *p<0.05; **p<0.01
![Page 158: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/158.jpg)
Case 2 – Male B6C3F1 miceHistorical Control Data
All Sites Rate (%) Range (%)
Hemangioma 0.5 0-4
Hemangiosarcoma 5.4 0-12
![Page 159: Histopath of carcinogenesis](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022013005/58eeec851a28abb2228b460d/html5/thumbnails/159.jpg)
Case 2 – Male B6C3F1 miceHistorical Control Data
Rate (%) Range (%)
Liver - Hemangioma 0.2 0-2
Spleen - Hemangioma 0.1 0-2
Subcutis - Hemangioma 0.0 0.0
Liver - Hemangiosarcoma 2.6 0-6
Spleen - Hemangiosarcoma 2.2 0-8
Subcutis - Hemangiosarcoma 0.7 0-4