Quantitative risk assessment

  • D. P. Lovell
  • G. Thomas


The objective of this chapter is to put the use of quantitative risk assessment (QRA) in the toxicological assessment of food chemicals into perspective. The use of QRA will be contrasted with other approaches which derive numerical safety standards or guidance values. The chapter aims to provide a historical perspective to the development of QRA methodology, a non-mathematical overview of the properties and limitations of the various mathematical models and a discussion of possible developments in the future.


Risk Assessment Safety Factor Quantitative Risk Assessment Tolerance Model Benchmark Dose 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, E.L. and the Carcinogen Assessment Group of the US Environmental Protection Agency (1983) Quantitative approaches in use to assess cancer risk. Risk Analysis, 3, 277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnes, D.G. and Dourson, M. (1988) Reference dose (RfD): description and use in health risk assessments. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 8, 471–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berry, C.L. (1988) The no-effect level and optimal use of toxicity data. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 8, 385–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. British Medical Association (1990) The BMA Guide to Living with Risk (Henderson, M., ed.). Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  5. Crump, K.S. (1984a) An improved procedure for low-dose carcinogenic assessment from animal data. Journal of Environmental Pathology, Toxicology and Oncology, 6, 339–348.Google Scholar
  6. Crump, K.S. (1984b) A new method for determining allowable daily intakes. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 4, 854–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crump, K.S., Hoel, D.G., Langley, C.H. and Peto, R. (1976) Fundamental carcinogenic processes and their implications for low-dose risk assessment. Cancer Research, 36, 2973–2979.Google Scholar
  8. Department of Health (1991) Guidelines for the Evaluation of Chemicals for Carcinogenicity. Report on Health and Social Subjects No. 42. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  9. Flamm, G.W. (1986) Risk assessment policy in the United States. In: Oftedal, P. and Brogger A. (eds) Risk and Reason: Risk Assessment in Relation to Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York, pp. 141–149.Google Scholar
  10. Food Safety Council (1980) Quantitative risk assessment. Food and Cosmetic Toxicology, 18, 711–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gonzalez, F.J. and Gelboin, H.V. (1993) Role of human cytochrome P-450s in risk assessment and susceptibility to environmentally based disease. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, 40, 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta, K.P., van Golen, K.L., Putman, K.L. and Randerath, K. (1993) Formation and persistence of safrole-DNA adducts over a 10,000-fold dose range in mouse liver. Carcinogenesis, 14, 1517–1521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hopper, L.D. and Oehme F.W. (1989) Chemical risk assessment: a review. Veterinary and Human Toxicology, 31, 543–554.Google Scholar
  14. Jasanoff, S. (1986) Comparative risk assessment — the lessons of cultural variation. In: Richardson, M. (ed.) Toxic Hazard Assessment of Chemicals. The Royal Society of Chemistry, London pp. 259–281.Google Scholar
  15. Johannsen, F.R. (1990) Risk assessment of carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic chemicals. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 20, 341–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lehman, A.J. and Fitzhugh, O.G. (1954) 100-fold margin of safety. Quarterly Bulletin of the Association of Food and Drug Officials of the United States, 18, 33–35.Google Scholar
  17. Lorentzen R.J. (1984) FDA procedures for carcinogenic risk assessment. Food Technology, 28, 108–111.Google Scholar
  18. Lovell, D.P. (1986) Risk assessment — general principles. In: Richardson, M. (ed.) Toxic Hazard Assessment of Chemicals. Royal Society of Chemistry, London, pp. 207–222.Google Scholar
  19. Lovell, D.P. and Thomas, G. (1996) Quantitative risk assessment and the limitations of the linearized multistage model. Human and Experimental Toxicology, 15, 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lu, F.C. and Sielken, R.L. Jr (1991) Assessment of safety/risk of chemicals: inception and evolution of the ADI and dose-response modelling procedures. Toxicology Letters, 59, 5–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mantel, N. and Bryan, W.R. (1961) ‘Safety’ testing of carcinogenic agents. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 27, 455–470.Google Scholar
  22. National Academy of Science/National Research Council (1983) Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  23. Perera, F., Mayer, J., Santella, R.M. et al. (1991) Biologic markers in risk assessment for environmental carcinogens. Environmental Health Perspectives, 90, 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Peto, R., Gray, R., Brantom, P. and Grasso, P. (1991) Effects on 4080 rats of chronic ingestion of N-nitrosodiethylamine or N-nitrosodimethylamine: a detailed dose-response study. Cancer Research, 51, 6415–6451.Google Scholar
  25. Renwick, A.G. (1991) Safety factors and the establishment of acceptable daily intakes. Food Additives and Contaminants, 8, 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Richardson, M.L. (ed.) (1985) Toxic Hazard Assessment of Chemicals. Royal Society of Chemistry, London.Google Scholar
  27. Rosenthal, A., Gray, G.M. and Graham, J.D. (1992) Legislating acceptable cancer risk from exposure to toxic chemicals. Ecology Law Quarterly, 19, 269–363.Google Scholar
  28. Royal Society (1983) Risk Assessment — A Study Group Report. The Royal Society, London.Google Scholar
  29. Royal Society (1992) Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management. Report of a Royal Society Study Group. The Royal Society, London.Google Scholar
  30. Rubery, E.D., Barlow, S.E. and Steadman, J.H. (1990) Criteria for setting estimates of acceptable intakes of chemicals in food in the UK. Food Additives and Contaminants, 7, 287–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schulte P.A. (1989) A conceptual framework for the validation and use of biologic markers. Environmental Research, 48, 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Staffa, J.A. and Mehlman, M.A. (eds) (1980) Innovations in cancer risk assessment (ED01 study). Journal of Environmental Pathology and Toxicology, 3, 1–249.Google Scholar
  33. US Environmental Protection Agency (1986) Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Federal Register, 51, 33992–34003.Google Scholar
  34. US Environmental Protection Agency (1996) Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. EPA/600/P-92/0036, April.Google Scholar
  35. Weil, C.S. (1972) Statistics vs safety factors and scientific judgement in the evaluation of safety for man. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 21, 454–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. World Health Organization (1962) Principles governing consumer safety in relation to pesticide residues. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Meeting of Experts on Pesticide Residues. WHO Technical Report Series 240.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. P. Lovell
  • G. Thomas

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations