Cancer weight of evidence for three lower acrylates: Conclusions and recommendations from an expert panel

C.R. Kirman*, P.J. Boogaard, J.S. Bus, V.L. Dellarco, L.R. DePass, B.R. Stern, S.M. Hays

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

An international panel of experts was engaged to assess the cancer weight of evidence (WOE) for three lower acrylates: methyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate, and 2-ethylhexyl acrylate. The review was structured as a three-round, modified Delphi format, a systematic process for collecting independent and deliberative input from panel members, and it included procedural elements to reduce bias and groupthink. Based upon the available science, the panel concluded: (1) The MOA for point of contact tumors observed in rodent cancer bioassays that is best supported by available data involves increased cell replication by cytotoxicity and regenerative proliferation; (2) The WOE supports a cancer classification of “Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans” a conclusion that is more in line with an IARC classification of Group 3 rather than Group 2 B; (3) Quantitative cancer potency values based on rodent tumor data are not required for these chemicals; and (4) Human health risk assessment for these chemicals should instead rely on non-cancer, precursor endpoints observed at the point of contact (e.g., hyperplasia). The degree of consensus (consensus scores of 0.84–0.91 out of a maximum score of 1) and degree of confidence (7.7–8.7 out of a maximum score of 10) in the WOE conclusions is considered high.

Original languageEnglish
Article number105469
JournalRegulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
Volume143
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2023

Keywords

  • Carcinogenicity
  • Expert panel
  • Genotoxicity
  • Mode of action
  • Risk assessment
  • Weight of evidence

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cancer weight of evidence for three lower acrylates: Conclusions and recommendations from an expert panel'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this