Search

The alkaline comet assay is frequently used as in vivo follow-up test within different regulatory environments to characterize the DNA-damaging potential of different test items. The corresponding OECD Test guideline 489 highlights the importance of statistical analyses and historical control data (HCD) but does not provide detailed procedures. Therefore, the working group "Statistics" of the German-speaking Society for Environmental Mutation Research (GUM) collected HCD from five laboratories and >200 comet assay studies and performed several statistical analyses. Key results included that (I) observed large inter-laboratory effects argue against the use of absolute quality thresholds, (II) > 50% zero values on a slide are considered problematic, due to their influence on slide or animal summary statistics, (III) the type of summarizing measure for single-cell data (e.g., median, arithmetic and geometric mean) may lead to extreme differences in resulting animal tail intensities and study outcome in the HCD. These summarizing values increase the reliability of analysis results by better meeting statistical model assumptions, but at the cost of information loss. Furthermore, the relation between negative and positive control groups in the data set was always satisfactorily (or sufficiently) based on ratio, difference and quantile analyses. • Compilation of negative control data from >200 in vivo alkaline comet assay studies. • Large inter-laboratory effects question regulatory usability of universal absolute quality thresholds. • More than 50 % zero values on a slide are considered statistically problematic and should lead to rejection of that slide. • The relation between negative and positive control groups was shown to be satisfactory concerning analyses of these groups. • The type of summarizing measure for single-cell data to generate an animal value can largely influence the study outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In genotoxicity testing of pharmaceuticals the rodent alkaline comet assay is being increasingly used as a second in vivo assay in addition to the in vivo micronucleus assay to mitigate in vitro positive results as recommended by the ICH S2(R1) guideline. This paper summarizes a survey suggested by the Safety Working Party of European Medicines Agency (EMA), and conducted by the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) to investigate the experience among European pharmaceutical companies by conducting the in vivo comet assay for regulatory purpose. A special focus was given on the typology of the obtained results and to identify potential difficulties encountered with the interpretation of study data. The participating companies reported a total of 147 studies (conducted in-house or outsourced) and shared the conclusion on the comet assay response for 136 studies. Most of the studies were negative (118/136). Only about 10% (14/136 studies) of the comet assays showed a positive response. None of the positive comet assay results were clearly associated with organ toxicity indicating that the positive responses are not due to cytotoxic effects of the compound in the tissue examined. The number of comet assays with an equivocal or inconclusive response was rare, respectively <1% (1/147 studies) and 2% (3/147 studies). In case additional information (e.g. repeat assay, organ toxicity, metabolism, tissue exposure) would have been available for evaluation, a final conclusion could most probably have been drawn for most or all of these studies. All (46) negative in vivo comet assays submitted alongside with a negative in vivo micronucleus assay were accepted by the regulatory authorities to mitigate a positive in vitro mammalian cell assay following the current ICH S2 guidance. The survey results demonstrate the robustness of the comet assay and the regulatory acceptance of the current ICH S2 guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]