Facts, myths, and reflections on the use of maximum tolerated dose in chemical carcinogenesis (review)

  • Authors:
    • B Toth
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: March 1, 1997     https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.10.3.529
  • Pages: 529-534
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

The introduction and the subsequent use of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or, more correctly, the estimated maximum tolerated dose (EMTD) in chemical carcinogenesis is reviewed. A historical perspective followed by the chronological development of the concept is described and commented on. The justifications and the criticisms of the EMTD are outlined and rebuttals of the criticisms are presented. The extrapolation of estimated risk from animal bioassay to humans is given and the notion of the ideal experiment is elaborated upon briefly. It is concluded that the EMTD is a necessary, crucial method in determining the carcinogenic activity of chemical substances and natural products until a better replacement is found.

Related Articles

Journal Cover

March 1997
Volume 10 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 1019-6439
Online ISSN:1791-2423

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Toth B: Facts, myths, and reflections on the use of maximum tolerated dose in chemical carcinogenesis (review). Int J Oncol 10: 529-534, 1997
APA
Toth, B. (1997). Facts, myths, and reflections on the use of maximum tolerated dose in chemical carcinogenesis (review). International Journal of Oncology, 10, 529-534. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.10.3.529
MLA
Toth, B."Facts, myths, and reflections on the use of maximum tolerated dose in chemical carcinogenesis (review)". International Journal of Oncology 10.3 (1997): 529-534.
Chicago
Toth, B."Facts, myths, and reflections on the use of maximum tolerated dose in chemical carcinogenesis (review)". International Journal of Oncology 10, no. 3 (1997): 529-534. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.10.3.529