农药致癌性分级与评估方法分析  

Analysis on pesticide carcinogenicity classification and evaluation methods

作　　者：李敏 任晓东 梁慧芯 林荣华 宗伏霖 LI Min;REN Xiaodong;LIANG Huixin;LIN Ronghua;ZONG Fulin(Institute for the Control of Agrochemicals,Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs,Beijing 100125,China)

机构地区：[1]农业农村部农药检定所,北京100125

出　　处：《农药学学报》2020年第6期915-924,共10页Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science

摘　　要：致癌性评价是农药风险评估的重要领域,然而,各国对于致癌物的分类方法及依据却存在差异。文章介绍了国际癌症研究机构(IARC)、美国环保署(EPA)和欧盟关于农药致癌物的分级标准和原则,分析了几种分级与评估方法的特点和差异。其中,IARC分级以危害为基础,不审查其他机构考虑的定量风险特征。致癌机制是分级的重要证据之一,但各机构采用的评估方法还普遍处于探索和完善当中。文章以草甘膦为例,阐述了因致癌性分级和评估方法的不同,以及证据收集与分析的差异而导致的致癌评估的复杂性,旨在为中国建立和完善农药致癌性评价体系,开展相关国际交流提供参考。Carcinogenicity evaluation is an important field of pesticide risk assessment. However, the criteria and evidences for carcinogen classification vary from country to country. In this review, the carcinogen classification systems and principles currently used by International Agency for Research on Cancer(IARC), United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) and European Union(EU)were summarized, and the characteristics and differences of them were analyzed. The IARC classification was based on the hazard level without reviewing the quantitative risk characteristics considered by other institutions. The mechanism of carcinogenesis was one of the important evidences for classification, but the associcated approaches adopted by various institutions were generally under processing. Taking glyphosate as an example, this review explained the complexity of carcinogenic evaluation due to differences in classification and evaluation methods, as well as differences in evidence collection and analysis. The purpose of this review is to provide reference for the establishment of pesticide carcinogen evaluation system and promotion related international communication in China.

关 键 词：致癌物 致癌性 分级 风险评估 草甘膦 国际癌症研究机构 美国环保署 

分 类 号：S481.1[农业科学—农药学] TQ450.26[农业科学—植物保护]