Search

Assessment of genotoxicity is a critical component of mode of action (MOA) analysis and carcinogen risk assessment due to its influence on quantitative risk extrapolation approaches. To date, clear guidance and expert consensus on the determination of a mutagenic MOA remains elusive, resulting in different estimates of carcinogenic risk for the same chemical among different stakeholders. Oral toxicity criteria for hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)], for example, differ by orders of magnitude due largely to the interpretation of in vivo genotoxicity data. Herein, we review in vivo genotoxicity studies for Cr(VI) to inform the MOA for Cr(VI)-induced tumors observed in a two-year cancer bioassay in mice and rats exposed via drinking water. Overall, genotoxicity results in carcinogenic target tissues (viz., oral cavity and duodenum) are negative. Results in the intestine are consistent with imaging data indicating little to no chromium present in the crypt compartment following oral exposure. Positive genotoxicity results in nontarget tissues have been reported at high doses mostly following nonphysiological routes of exposure. Given the negative genotoxicity results in carcinogenic target organs from oral exposure to Cr(VI), there is scientific justification to support the use of nonlinear low-dose extrapolation methods in the derivation of oral toxicity criteria for Cr(VI). These results highlight important differences between genotoxicity testing for hazard identification purposes and quantitative risk assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Test Guideline (TG) 488 for the transgenic rodent (TGR) mutation assay recommends two sampling times for assessing germ cell mutagenicity following the required 28-day exposure period: 28 + > 49 days for mouse sperm and 28 + >70 days for rat sperm from the cauda epididymis, or three days (i.e., 28 + 3d) for germ cells from seminiferous tubules (hereafter, tubule germ cells) plus caudal sperm for mouse and rat. Although the latter protocol is commonly used for mutagenicity testing in somatic tissues, it has several shortcomings for germ cell testing because it provides limited exposure of the proliferating phase of spermatogenesis when mutations are fixed in the transgene. Indeed, analysis of sperm at 28 + 3d has generated negative results with established germ cell mutagens, while the analysis of tubule germ cells has generated both positive and either negative or equivocal results. The Germ Cell workgroup of the Genetic Toxicology Technical Committee of the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute modelled mouse and rat spermatogenesis to better define the exposure history of the cell population collected from seminiferous tubules. The modelling showed that mouse tubule germ cells at 28 + 3d receive, as a whole, 42% of the total exposure during the proliferating phase. This percentage increases to 99% at 28 + 28d and reaches 100% at 28 + 30d. In the rat, these percentages are 22% and 80% at 28 + 3d and 28 + 28d, reaching 100% at 28 + 44d. These results show that analysis of tubule germ cells at 28 + 28d may be an effective protocol for assessing germ cell mutagenicity in mice and rats using TG 488. Since TG 488 recommends the 28 + 28d protocol for slow dividing somatic tissues, this appears to be a better compromise than 28 + 3d when slow dividing somatic tissues or germ cells are the critical tissues of interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Test Guideline 488 (TG 488) provides recommendations for assessing germ cell and somatic cell mutagenicity using transgenic rodent (TGR) models. However, important data gaps exist for selecting an optimal approach for simultaneously evaluating mutagenicity in both cell types. It is uncertain whether analysis of germ cells from seminiferous tubules (hereafter, tubule germ cells) or caudal sperm within the recommended design for somatic tissues (i.e., 28 days of exposure plus three days of fixation time, 28 + 3d) has enough sensitivity to detect an effect as compared with the analysis of sperm within the recommended design for germ cells (i.e., 28 + 49d and 28 + 70d for mouse and rat, respectively). To address these data gaps, the Germ Cell workgroup of the Genetic Toxicology Technical Committee of the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute reviewed the available TGR mutagenicity data in male germ cells, and, characterized the exposure history of tubule germ cells for different sampling times to evaluate its impact on germ cell mutagenicity testing using TG 488. Our analyses suggest that evaluating mutant frequencies in: i) sperm from the cauda epididymis at 28 + 3d does not provide meaningful mutagenicity data; ii), tubule germ cells at 28 + 3d provides reliable mutagenicity data only if the results are positive; and iii) tubule germ cells at 28 + 28d produces reliable positive and negative results in both mice and rats. Thus, the 28 + 28d regimen may provide an approach for simultaneously assessing mutagenicity in somatic tissues and germ cells from the same animals. Further work is required to support the 28 + 28d protocol for tissues other than slowly proliferating tissues as per current TG 488. Finally, recommendations are provided to guide the experimental design for germ cell mutagenicity data for regulatory submission, as well as other possible approaches to increase the reliability of the TGR assay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a monograph in 2015 concluding that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A) based on limited evidence in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals. It was also concluded that there was strong evidence of genotoxicity and oxidative stress. Four Expert Panels have been convened for the purpose of conducting a detailed critique of the evidence in light of IARC’s assessment and to review all relevant information pertaining to glyphosate exposure, animal carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, and epidemiologic studies. Two of the Panels (animal bioassay and genetic toxicology) also provided a critique of the IARC position with respect to conclusions made in these areas. The incidences of neoplasms in the animal bioassays were found not to be associated with glyphosate exposure on the basis that they lacked statistical strength, were inconsistent across studies, lacked dose-response relationships, were not associated with preneoplasia, and/or were not plausible from a mechanistic perspective. The overall weight of evidence from the genetic toxicology data supports a conclusion that glyphosate (including GBFs and AMPA) does not pose a genotoxic hazard and therefore, should not be considered support for the classification of glyphosate as a genotoxic carcinogen. The assessment of the epidemiological data found that the data do not support a causal relationship between glyphosate exposure and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma while the data were judged to be too sparse to assess a potential relationship between glyphosate exposure and multiple myeloma. As a result, following the review of the totality of the evidence, the Panels concluded that the data do not support IARC’s conclusion that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen” and, consistent with previous regulatory assessments, further concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a monograph concluding there was strong evidence for genotoxicity of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations and moderate evidence for genotoxicity of the metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA). These conclusions contradicted earlier extensive reviews supporting the lack of genotoxicity of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations. The IARC Monograph concluded there was strong evidence of induction of oxidative stress by glyphosate, glyphosate formulations, and AMPA. The Expert Panel reviewed the genotoxicity and oxidative stress data considered in the IARC Monograph, together with other available data not considered by IARC. The Expert Panel defined and used a weight of evidence (WoE) approach that included ranking of studies and endpoints by the strength of their linkage to events associated with carcinogenic mechanisms. Importantly, the Expert Panel concluded that there was sufficient information available from a very large number of regulatory genotoxicity studies that should have been considered by IARC. The WoE approach, the inclusion of all relevant regulatory studies, and some differences in interpretation of individual studies led to significantly different conclusions by the Expert Panel compared with the IARC Monograph. The Expert Panel concluded that glyphosate, glyphosate formulations, and AMPA do not pose a genotoxic hazard and the data do not support the IARC Monograph genotoxicity evaluation. With respect to carcinogenicity classification and mechanism, the Expert Panel concluded that evidence relating to an oxidative stress mechanism of carcinogenicity was largely unconvincing and that the data profiles were not consistent with the characteristics of genotoxic carcinogens. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Titanium dioxide is a ubiquitous white material found in a diverse range of products from foods to sunscreens, as a pigment and thickener, amongst other uses. Titanium dioxide has been considered no longer safe for use in foods (nano and microparticles of E171) by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) due to concerns over genotoxicity. There are however, conflicting opinions regarding the safety of Titanium dioxide. In an attempt to clarify the situation, a comprehensive weight of evidence (WoE) assessment of the genotoxicity of titanium dioxide based on the available data was performed. A total of 192 datasets for endpoints and test systems considered the most relevant for identifying mutagenic and carcinogenic potential were reviewed and discussed for both reliability and relevance (by weight of evidence) and in the context of whether the physico-chemical properties of the particles had been characterised. The view of an independent panel of experts was that, of the 192 datasets identified, only 34 met the reliability and quality criteria for being most relevant in the evaluation of genotoxicity. Of these, 10 were positive (i.e. reported evidence that titanium dioxide was genotoxic), all of which were from studies of DNA strand breakage (comet assay) or chromosome damage (micronucleus or chromosome aberration assays). All the positive findings were associated with high cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, inflammation, apoptosis, necrosis, or combinations of these. Considering that DNA and chromosome breakage can be secondary to physiological stress, it is highly likely that the observed genotoxic effects of titanium dioxide, including those with nanoparticles, are secondary to physiological stress. Consistent with this finding, there were no positive results from the in vitro and in vivo gene mutation studies evaluated, although it should be noted that to definitively conclude a lack of mutagenicity, more robust in vitro and in vivo gene mutation studies would be useful. Existing evidence does not therefore support a direct DNA damaging mechanism for titanium dioxide (nano and other forms). • EFSA have recently banned titanium dioxide in foods due to concerns over genotoxicity. • A tiered weight of evidence analysis was performed on genotoxicity data for TiO 2 , according to relevance and reliability. • TiO 2 was positive for chromosome damage mainly at levels where reactive oxygen or other cellular toxicity were prevalent. • TiO 2 was negative for point mutations in vivo , the panel noted more data would be required to make definitive conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of the international Pig-a validation trials, we examined the induction of Pig-a mutant reticulocytes and red blood cells (RETCD59- and RBCCD59-, respectively) in peripheral blood of male Sprague Dawley® rats treated with urethane (25, 100 and 250 mg/kg/day) or saline by oral gavage for 29 days. Additional endpoints integrated into this study were: micronucleated reticulocytes (MN-RET) in peripheral blood; chromosome aberrations (CAb) and DNA damage (%tail intensity via the comet assay) in peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL); micronucleated polychromatic erythrocytes (MN-PCE) in bone marrow; and DNA damage (comet) in various organs at termination (the 29th dose was added for the comet endpoint at sacrifice). Ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS;200 mg/kg/day on Days 3, 4, 13, 14, 15, 27, 28 and 29) was evaluated as the concurrent positive control (PC). All animals survived to termination and none exhibited overt toxicity, but there were significant differences in body weight and body weight gain in the 250-mg/kg/day urethane group, as compared with the saline control animals. Statistically significant, dose-dependent increases were observed for urethane for: RETCD59- and RBCCD59- (on Days 15 and 29); MN-RET (on Days 4,15 and 29); and MN-PCE (on Day 29). The comet assay yielded positive results in PBL (Day 15) and liver (Day 29), but negative results for PBL (Days 4 and 29) and brain, kidney and lung (Day 29). No significant increases in PBL CAb were observed at any sample time. Except for PBL CAb (likely due to excessive cytotoxicity), EMS-induced significant increases in all endpoints/tissues. These results compare favorably with earlier in vivo observations and demonstrate the utility and sensitivity of the Pig-a in vivo gene mutation assay, and its ability to be easily integrated, along with other standard genotoxicity endpoints, into 28-day rodent toxicity studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This workshop reviewed the current science to inform and recommend the best evidence-based approaches on the use of germ cell genotoxicity tests. The workshop questions and key outcomes were as follows. (1) Do genotoxicity and mutagenicity assays in somatic cells predict germ cell effects? Limited data suggest that somatic cell tests detect most germ cell mutagens, but there are strong concerns that dictate caution in drawing conclusions. (2) Should germ cell tests be done, and when? If there is evidence that a chemical or its metabolite(s) will not reach target germ cells or gonadal tissue, it is not necessary to conduct germ cell tests, notwithstanding somatic outcomes. However, it was recommended that negative somatic cell mutagens with clear evidence for gonadal exposure and evidence of toxicity in germ cells could be considered for germ cell mutagenicity testing. For somatic mutagens that are known to reach the gonadal compartments and expose germ cells, the chemical could be assumed to be a germ cell mutagen without further testing. Nevertheless, germ cell mutagenicity testing would be needed for quantitative risk assessment. (3) What new assays should be implemented and how? There is an immediate need for research on the application of whole genome sequencing in heritable mutation analysis in humans and animals, and integration of germ cell assays with somatic cell genotoxicity tests. Focus should be on environmental exposures that can cause de novo mutations, particularly newly recognized types of genomic changes. Mutational events, which may occur by exposure of germ cells during embryonic development, should also be investigated. Finally, where there are indications of germ cell toxicity in repeat dose or reproductive toxicology tests, consideration should be given to leveraging those studies to inform of possible germ cell genotoxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The in vitro human reconstructed skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay in EpiDerm™ is a promising new assay for evaluating genotoxicity of dermally applied chemicals. A global pre-validation project sponsored by the European Cosmetics Association (Cosmetics Europe - formerly known as COLIPA), and the European Center for Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), is underway. Results to date demonstrate international inter-laboratory and inter-experimental reproducibility of the assay for chemicals that do not require metabolism [Aardema et al., Mutat. Res. 701 (2010) 123–131]. We have expanded these studies to investigate chemicals that do require metabolic activation: 4-nitroquinoline-N-oxide (4NQO), cyclophosphamide (CP), dimethylbenzanthracene (DMBA), dimethylnitrosamine (DMN), dibenzanthracene (DBA) and benzo(a)pyrene (BaP). In this study, the standard protocol of two applications over 48h was compared with an extended protocol involving three applications over 72h. Extending the treatment period to 72h changed the result significantly only for 4NQO, which was negative in the standard 48h dosing regimen, but positive with the 72h treatment. DMBA and CP were positive in the standard 48h assay (CP induced a more reproducible response with the 72h treatment) and BaP gave mixed results; DBA and DMN were negative in both the 48h and the 72h dosing regimens. While further work with chemicals that require metabolism is needed, it appears that the RMSN assay detects some chemicals that require metabolic activation (4 out of 6 chemicals were positive in one or both protocols). At this point in time, for general testing, the use of a longer treatment period in situations where the standard 48h treatment is negative or questionable is recommended. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The potential for a compound to induce carcinogenicity is a key consideration when ascertaining hazard and risk assessment of chemicals. Among the in vitro alternatives that have been developed for predicting carcinogenicity, in vitro cell transformation assays (CTAs) have been shown to involve a multistage process that closely models important stages of in vivo carcinogenesis and have the potential to detect both genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. These assays have been in use for decades and a substantial amount of data demonstrating their performance is available in the literature. However, for the standardised use of these assays for regulatory purposes, a formal evaluation of the assays, in particular focusing on development of standardised transferable protocols and further information on assay reproducibility, was considered important to serve as a basis for the drafting of generally accepted OECD test guidelines. To address this issue, a prevalidation study of the CTAs using the BALB/c 3T3 cell line, SHE cells at pH 6.7, and SHE cells at pH 7.0 was coordinated by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and focused on issues of standardisation of protocols, test method transferability and within- and between-laboratory reproducibility. The study resulted in the availability of standardised protocols that had undergone prevalidation . The results of the ECVAM study demonstrated that for the BALB/c 3T3 method, some modifications to the protocol were needed to obtain reproducible results between laboratories, while the SHE pH 6.7 and the SHE pH 7.0 protocols are transferable between laboratories, and results are reproducible within- and between-laboratories. It is recommended that the BALB/c 3T3 and SHE protocols as instituted in this prevalidation study should be used in future applications of these respective transformation assays. To support their harmonised use and regulatory application, the development of an OECD test guideline for the SHE CTAs, based on the protocol published in this issue, is recommended. The development of an OECD test guideline for the BALB/c 3T3 CTA should likewise be further pursued upon the availability of additional supportive data and improvement of the statistical analysis. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Cell transformation assays (CTAs) have long been proposed as in vitro methods for the identification of potential chemical carcinogens. Despite showing good correlation with rodent bioassay data, concerns over the subjective nature of using morphological criteria for identifying transformed cells and a lack of understanding of the mechanistic basis of the assays has limited their acceptance for regulatory purposes. However, recent drivers to find alternative carcinogenicity assessment methodologies, such as the Seventh Amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive, have fuelled renewed interest in CTAs. Research is currently ongoing to improve the objectivity of the assays, reveal the underlying molecular changes leading to transformation and explore the use of novel cell types. The UK NC3Rs held an international workshop in November 2010 to review the current state of the art in this field and provide directions for future research. This paper outlines the key points highlighted at this meeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Recently, a novel in vitro reconstructed skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay incorporating the EpiDerm™ 3D human skin model (Curren et al., Mutat. Res. 607 (2006) 192–204; Mun et al., Mutat. Res. 673 (2009) 92–99) has been shown to produce comparable data when utilized in three different laboratories in the United States (Hu et al., Mutat. Res. 673 (2009) 100–108). As part of a project sponsored by the European cosmetics companies trade association (COLIPA), with a contribution from the European Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), international prevalidation studies of the RSMN assay have been initiated. The assay was transferred and optimized in two laboratories in Europe, where dose-dependent, reproducibly positive results for mitomycin C and vinblastine sulfate were obtained. Further intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility of the RSMN assay was established by testing three coded chemicals, N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea, cyclohexanone, and mitomycin C. All chemicals were correctly identified by all laboratories as either positive or negative. These results support the international inter-laboratory and inter-experimental reproducibility of the assay and reinforce the conclusion that the RSMN assay in the EpiDerm™ 3D human skin model is a valuable in vitro method for assessment of genotoxicity of dermally applied chemicals. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The upcoming ban on testing of cosmetics in animals by the European Union''s 7th Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive will require genotoxicity safety assessments of cosmetics ingredients and final formulations to be based primarily on in vitro genotoxicity tests. The current in vitro test battery produces an unacceptably high rate of false positives, and used by itself would effectively prevent the use and development of many ingredients that are actually safe for human use. To address the need for an in vitro test that is more predictive of genotoxicity in vivo, we have developed an in vitro micronucleus assay using a three-dimensional human reconstructed skin model (EpiDerm™) that more closely mimics the normal dermal exposure route of chemicals. We have refined this model and assessed its ability to predict genotoxicity of a battery of chemicals that have been previously classified as genotoxins or non-genotoxins based on in vivo rodent skin tests. Our reconstructed skin micronucleus assay correctly identified 7 genotoxins and 5 non-genotoxins, demonstrating its potential to have a higher predictive value than currently available in vitro genotoxicity tests, and its utility as part of a comprehensive in vitro genotoxicity testing strategy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Dextromethorphan (DMP) is an effective and widely used antitussive drug. While DMP has over a 50 year safe-marketing history, the only available genotoxicity data was an unpublished, negative Ames assay (Roche). Lack of a complete genotoxicity profile on DMP, specifically covering the chromosomal damage endpoint, prompted a regulatory request for an in vitro chromosome aberration assay. In accordance with EC and CPMP Guidance, we evaluated data for a number of chemicals with a structural relationship to DMP. DMP contains no structural alerts for genotoxicity or carcinogenicity using the Deductive Estimation of Risk from Existing Knowledge (DEREK) software tool, confirming the negative results obtained in the existing Ames assay. This is also consistent with the mostly negative genotoxicity and carcinogenicity data available on structurally related chemicals including morphine, codeine, nalbuphine, buprenorphine, naloxone, hydromorphone, levorphanol, and oxycodone. A state-of-the-science, in vitro chromosome aberration assay was also conducted, which demonstrated a lack of genotoxicity for DMP. The overall weight of evidence for DMP and its structural analogues, supports the conclusion that this class of phenanthrene-based chemicals, and DMP, in particular, are not genotoxic in vitro or in vivo, and do not represent a carcinogenic risk to patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In vitro genotoxicity assays are often used to screen and predict whether chemicals might represent mutagenic and carcinogenic risks for humans. Recent discussions have focused on the high rate of positive results in in vitro tests, especially in those assays performed in mammalian cells that are not confirmed in vivo. Currently, there is no general consensus in the scientific community on the interpretation of the significance of positive results from the in vitro genotoxicity assays. To address this issue, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI), held an international workshop in June 2006 to discuss the relevance and follow-up of positive results in in vitro genetic toxicity assays. The goals of the meeting were to examine ways to advance the scientific basis for the interpretation of positive findings in in vitro assays, to facilitate the development of follow-up testing strategies and to define criteria for determining the relevance to human health. The workshop identified specific needs in two general categories, i.e., improved testing and improved data interpretation and risk assessment. Recommendations to improve testing included: (1) re-examine the maximum level of cytotoxicity currently required for in vitro tests; (2) re-examine the upper limit concentration for in vitro mammalian studies; (3) develop improved testing strategies using current in vitro assays; (4) define criteria to guide selection of the appropriate follow-up in vivo studies; (5) develop new and more predictive in vitro and in vivo tests. Recommendations for improving interpretation and assessment included: (1) examine the suitability of applying the threshold of toxicological concern concepts to genotoxicity data; (2) develop a structured weight of evidence approach for assessing genotoxic/carcinogenic hazard; and (3) re-examine in vitro and in vivo correlations qualitatively and quantitatively. Conclusions from the workshop highlighted a willingness of scientists from various sectors to change and improve the current paradigm and move from a hazard identification approach to a “realistic” risk-based approach that incorporates information on mechanism of action, kinetics, and human exposure.. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: One of the consequences of the low specificity of the in vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity assays reported in our previous paper [D. Kirkland, M. Aardema, L. Henderson, L. Müller, Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens. I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity, Mutat. Res. 584 (2005) 1–256] is industry and regulatory agencies dealing with a large number of false-positive results during the safety assessment of new chemicals and drugs. Addressing positive results from in vitro genotoxicity assays to determine which are “false” requires extensive resources, including the conduct of additional animal studies. In order to reduce animal usage, and to conserve industry and regulatory agency resources, we thought it was important to raise the question as to whether the protocol requirements for a valid in vitro assay or the criteria for a positive result could be changed in order to increase specificity without a significant loss in sensitivity of these tests. We therefore analysed some results of the mouse lymphoma assay (MLA) and the chromosomal aberration (CA) test obtained for rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens in more detail. For a number of chemicals that are positive only in either of these mammalian cell tests (i.e. negative in the Ames test) there was no correlation between rodent carcinogenicity and level of toxicity (we could not analyse this for the CA test as insufficient data were available in publications), magnitude of response or lowest effective positive concentration. On the basis of very limited in vitro and in vivo data, we could also find no correlation between the above parameters and formation of DNA adducts. Therefore, a change to the current criteria for required level of toxicity in the MLA, to limit positive calls to certain magnitudes of response, or to certain concentration ranges would not improve the specificity of the tests without significantly reducing the sensitivity. We also investigated a possible correlation between tumour profile (trans-species, trans-sex and multi-site versus single-species, single-sex and single-site) and pattern of genotoxicity results. Carcinogens showing the combination of trans-species, trans-sex and multi-site tumour profile were much more prevalent (70% more) in the group of chemicals giving positive results in all three in vitro assays than amongst those giving all negative results. However, single-species, single-sex, single-site carcinogens were not very prevalent even amongst those chemicals giving three negative results in vitro. Surprisingly, when mixed positive and negative results were compared, multi-site carcinogens were highly prevalent amongst chemicals giving only a single positive result in the battery of three in vitro tests. Finally we extended our relative predictivity (RP) calculations to combinations of positive and negative results in the genotoxicity battery. For two out of three tests positive, the RP for carcinogenicity was no higher than 1.0 and for 2/3 tests negative the RP for non-carcinogenicity was either zero (for Ames+MLA+MN) or 1.7 (for Ames+MLA+CA). Thus, all values were less than a meaningful RP of two, and indicate that it is not possible to predict outcome of the rodent carcinogenicity study when only 2/3 genotoxicity results are in agreement. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In this report, results are presented from an international study of the in vitro micronucleus assay using Chinese hamster ovary cells. This study was coordinated by an organizing committee supported by the SFTG (the French branch of the European Environmental Mutagen Society). Test chemicals included mannitol, bleomycin, cytosine arabinoside, urethane and diethylstilboestrol. Mitomycin C was used as a positive control. Each chemical was evaluated in at least two laboratories following a variety of different protocols (short and long exposures, varying recovery times, with and without cytochalasin B) in order to help determine a standard protocol for routine testing in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Mannitol and urethane were negative, while bleomycin, cytosine arabinoside and diethylstilboestrol induced a dose dependent increase in micronucleated cells. In the presence of cytochalasin B, increases in micronuclei were observed in binucleated as well as mononucleated cells in cultures treated with bleomycin, cytosine arabinoside or diethylstilboestrol. Importantly, all three of these chemicals were detected in each of the different treatment/recovery regimens. No differences were seen in the sensitivity or accuracy of the responses in the presence of absence of cytochalasin B. Overall, these results demonstrate the suitability of Chinese hamster ovary cells for the in vitro micronucleus assay. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The performance of a battery of three of the most commonly used in vitro genotoxicity tests—Ames+mouse lymphoma assay (MLA)+in vitro micronucleus (MN) or chromosomal aberrations (CA) test—has been evaluated for its ability to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens, from a large database of over 700 chemicals compiled from the CPDB (“Gold”), NTP, IARC and other publications. We re-evaluated many (113 MLA and 30 CA) previously published genotoxicity results in order to categorise the performance of these assays using the response categories we established. The sensitivity of the three-test battery was high. Of the 553 carcinogens for which there were valid genotoxicity data, 93% of the rodent carcinogens evaluated in at least one assay gave positive results in at least one of the three tests. Combinations of two and three test systems had greater sensitivity than individual tests resulting in sensitivities of around 90% or more, depending on test combination. Only 19 carcinogens (out of 206 tested in all three tests, considering CA and MN as alternatives) gave consistently negative results in a full three-test battery. Most were either carcinogenic via a non-genotoxic mechanism (liver enzyme inducers, peroxisome proliferators, hormonal carcinogens) considered not necessarily relevant for humans, or were extremely weak (presumed) genotoxic carcinogens (e.g. N-nitrosodiphenylamine). Two carcinogens (5-chloro-o-toluidine, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane) may have a genotoxic element to their carcinogenicity and may have been expected to produce positive results somewhere in the battery. We identified 183 chemicals that were non-carcinogenic after testing in both male and female rats and mice. There were genotoxicity data on 177 of these. The specificity of the Ames test was reasonable (73.9%), but all mammalian cell tests had very low specificity (i.e. below 45%), and this declined to extremely low levels in combinations of two and three test systems. When all three tests were performed, 75–95% of non-carcinogens gave positive (i.e. false positive) results in at least one test in the battery. The extremely low specificity highlights the importance of understanding the mechanism by which genotoxicity may be induced (whether it is relevant for the whole animal or human) and using weight of evidence approaches to assess the carcinogenic risk from a positive genotoxicity signal. It also highlights deficiencies in the current prediction from and understanding of such in vitro results for the in vivo situation. It may even signal the need for either a reassessment of the conditions and criteria for positive results (cytotoxicity, solubility, etc.) or the development and use of a completely new set of in vitro tests (e.g. mutation in transgenic cell lines, systems with inherent metabolic activity avoiding the use of S9, measurement of genetic changes in more cancer-relevant genes or hotspots of genes, etc.). It was very difficult to assess the performance of the in vitro MN test, particularly in combination with other assays, because the published database for this assay is relatively small at this time. The specificity values for the in vitro MN assay may improve if data from a larger proportion of the known non-carcinogens becomes available, and a larger published database of results with the MN assay is urgently needed if this test is to be appreciated for regulatory use. However, specificity levels of <50% will still be unacceptable. Despite these issues, by adopting a relative predictivity (RP) measure (ratio of real:false results), it was possible to establish that positive results in all three tests indicate the chemical is greater than three times more likely to be a rodent carcinogen than a non-carcinogen. Likewise, negative results in all three tests indicate the chemical is greater than two times more likely to be a rodent non-carcinogen than a carcinogen. This RP measure is considered a useful tool for industry to assess the likelihood of a chemical possessing carcinogenic potential from batteries of positive or negative results. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The unprecedented advances in molecular biology during the last two decades have resulted in a dramatic increase in knowledge about gene structure and function, an immense database of genetic sequence information, and an impressive set of efficient new technologies for monitoring genetic sequences, genetic variation, and global functional gene expression. These advances have led to a new sub-discipline of toxicology: “toxicogenomics”. We define toxicogenomics as “the study of the relationship between the structure and activity of the genome (the cellular complement of genes) and the adverse biological effects of exogenous agents”. This broad definition encompasses most of the variations in the current usage of this term, and in its broadest sense includes studies of the cellular products controlled by the genome (messenger RNAs, proteins, metabolites, etc.). The new “global” methods of measuring families of cellular molecules, such as RNA, proteins, and intermediary metabolites have been termed “-omic” technologies, based on their ability to characterize all, or most, members of a family of molecules in a single analysis. With these new tools, we can now obtain complete assessments of the functional activity of biochemical pathways, and of the structural genetic (sequence) differences among individuals and species, that were previously unattainable. These powerful new methods of high-throughput and multi-endpoint analysis include gene expression arrays that will soon permit the simultaneous measurement of the expression of all human genes on a single “chip”. Likewise, there are powerful new methods for protein analysis (proteomics: the study of the complement of proteins in the cell) and for analysis of cellular small molecules (metabonomics: the study of the cellular metabolites formed and degraded under genetic control). This will likely be extended in the near future to other important classes of biomolecules such as lipids, carbohydrates, etc. These assays provide a general capability for global assessment of many classes of cellular molecules, providing new approaches to assessing functional cellular alterations. These new methods have already facilitated significant advances in our understanding of the molecular responses to cell and tissue damage, and of perturbations in functional cellular systems.As a result of this rapidly changing scientific environment, regulatory and industrial toxicology practice is poised to undergo dramatic change during the next decade. These advances present exciting opportunities for improved methods of identifying and evaluating potential human and environmental toxicants, and of monitoring the effects of exposures to these toxicants. These advances also present distinct challenges. For example, the significance of specific changes and the performance characteristics of new methods must be fully understood to avoid misinterpretation of data that could lead to inappropriate conclusions about the toxicity of a chemical or a mechanism of action. We discuss the likely impact of these advances on the fields of general and genetic toxicology, and risk assessment. We anticipate that these new technologies will (1) lead to new families of biomarkers that permit characterization and efficient monitoring of cellular perturbations, (2) provide an increased understanding of the influence of genetic variation on toxicological outcomes, and (3) allow definition of environmental causes of genetic alterations and their relationship to human disease. The broad application of these new approaches will likely erase the current distinctions among the fields of toxicology, pathology, genetic toxicology, and molecular genetics. Instead, a new integrated approach will likely emerge that involves a comprehensive understanding of genetic control of cellular functions, and of cellular responses to alterations in normal molecular structure and function. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

4-Methylimidazole (4-MeI) is a byproduct formed during the cooking of foods containing carbohydrates and amino acids, including the production of flavors and coloring substances, e.g., class III and IV caramel colors, used in many food products with extensive human exposure. Two-year rodent bioassays via oral exposure conducted by the National Toxicology Program reported evidence of carcinogenicity only in B6C3F 1 mice (increased alveolar/bronchial neoplasms). In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified 4-MeI as Group 2B, "possibly carcinogenic to humans". An expert panel was commissioned to assess the genotoxic potential of 4-MeI and the plausibility of a genotoxic mode of action in the formation of lung tumors in mice when exposed to high doses of 4-MeI. The panel defined and used a weight-of-evidence (WOE) approach that included thorough evaluation of studies assessing the genotoxic potential of 4-MeI. The panelists categorized each study, consisting of study weight, degree of technical performance, study reliability, and contribution to the overall WOE. Based on the reviewed studies' weighted contribution, the panel unanimously concluded that the WOE supports no clear evidence of in vivo genotoxicity of 4-MeI and no association for a genotoxic mode of action in the formation of mouse lung tumors. • An expert panel assessed the genotoxic potential of 4-methylimidazole (4-MeI). • The panel used a weight-of-evidence (WOE) approach for 4-MeI study evaluation. • The expert panel evaluated study reliability and contribution to the overall WOE. • The expert panel found no clear evidence of in vivo genotoxicity of 4-MeI. • Genotoxic mode of action for mouse lung tumor formation is not plausible for 4-MeI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to evaluate the utility of the 3D reconstructed skin micronucleus assay (3DRSMN) to assess clastogenic/aneugenic potential of the fragrance chemicals, a set of 22 fragrance materials were evaluated in 3DRSMN assay. These materials evaluated were also evaluated in an in vitro as well as in vivo micronucleus assay, conducted as per Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development guidelines. The results of the RSMN assay were in 100% agreement with the in vivo micronucleus assay results. From this dataset, 18 materials were positive in an in vitro micronucleus assay but were negative in an in vivo micronucleus assay. All these 18 materials were also concluded to be negative in 3DRSMN assay, stressing the importance of the assay to help minimize misleading positive outcomes from the in vitro assay. Since the highest exposure for fragrances is through the dermal route, the RSMN assay fits the applicability domain for testing. Thus, RSMN assay is an important alternative to animal testing for characterization of the genotoxicity potential of fragrance materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nanomaterials (NMs) present unique challenges in safety evaluation. An international working group, the Genetic Toxicology Technical Committee of the International Life Sciences Institute’s Health and Environmental Sciences Institute, has addressed issues related to the genotoxicity assessment of NMs. A critical review of published data has been followed by recommendations on methods alterations and best practices for the standard genotoxicity assays: bacterial reverse mutation (Ames); in vitro mammalian assays for mutations, chromosomal aberrations, micronucleus induction, or DNA strand breaks (comet); and in vivo assays for genetic damage (micronucleus, comet and transgenic mutation assays). The analysis found a great diversity of tests and systems used for in vitro assays; many did not meet criteria for a valid test, and/or did not use validated cells and methods in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Test Guidelines, and so these results could not be interpreted. In vivo assays were less common but better performed. It was not possible to develop conclusions on test system agreement, NM activity, or mechanism of action. However, the limited responses observed for most NMs were consistent with indirect genotoxic effects, rather than direct interaction of NMs with DNA. We propose a revised genotoxicity test battery for NMs that includes in vitro mammalian cell mutagenicity and clastogenicity assessments; in vivo assessments would be added only if warranted by information on specific organ exposure or sequestration of NMs. The bacterial assays are generally uninformative for NMs due to limited particle uptake and possible lack of mechanistic relevance, and are thus omitted in our recommended test battery for NM assessment. Recommendations include NM characterization in the test medium, verification of uptake into target cells, and limited assay-specific methods alterations to avoid interference with uptake or endpoint analysis. These recommendations are summarized in a Roadmap guideline for testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The OECD guideline for the in vitro mammalian cell micronucleus test (OECD 487) was recently adopted in July 22, 2010. Since its publication, it has become apparent that the guidance for testing chemicals where solubility is a limiting factor can be interpreted in a variety of ways. In this communication, we provide clarification for testing insoluble chemicals. The intent of the OECD 487 guideline is for the high dose to be the lowest precipitating concentration even if toxicity occurs above the solubility limit in tissue culture medium. Examination of precipitation can be done by the unaided eye or microscopically. Precipitation is examined at the onset or end of treatment, with the intent to identify precipitate present during treatment. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Two year rodent bioassays play a key role in the assessment of carcinogenic potential of chemicals to humans. The seventh amendment to the European Cosmetics Directive will ban in 2013 the marketing of cosmetic and personal care products that contain ingredients that have been tested in animal models. Thus 2-year rodent bioassays will not be available for cosmetics/personal care products. Furthermore, for large testing programs like REACH, in vivo carcinogenicity testing is impractical. Alternative ways to carcinogenicity assessment are urgently required. In terms of standardization and validation, the most advanced in vitro tests for carcinogenicity are the cell transformation assays (CTAs). Although CTAs do not mimic the whole carcinogenesis process in vivo, they represent a valuable support in identifying transforming potential of chemicals. CTAs have been shown to detect genotoxic as well as non-genotoxic carcinogens and are helpful in the determination of thresholds for genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. The extensive review on CTAs by the OECD (OECD (2007) Environmental Health and Safety Publications, Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 31) and the proven within- and between-laboratories reproducibility of the SHE CTAs justifies broader use of these methods to assess carcinogenic potential of chemicals. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The selection of maximum concentrations for in vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity assays was reviewed at the 5th International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT), 2009. Currently, the top concentration recommended when toxicity is not limiting is 10mM or 5mg/ml, whichever is lower. The discussion was whether to reduce the limit, and if so whether the 1mM limit proposed for human pharmaceuticals was appropriate for testing other chemicals. The consensus was that there was reason to consider reducing the 10mM limit, and many, but not all, attendees favored a reduction to 1mM. Several proposals are described here for the concentration limit. The in vitro cytogenetics expert working group also discussed appropriate measures and level of cytotoxicity. Data were reviewed from a multi-laboratory trial of the in vitro micronucleus (MN) assay with multiple cell types and several types of toxicity measurements. The group agreed on a preference for toxicity measures that take cell proliferation after the beginning of treatment into account (relative increase in cell counts, relative population doubling, cytokinesis block proliferation index or replicative index), and that this applies both to in vitro MN assays and to in vitro chromosome aberration assays. Since relative cell counts (RCC) underestimate toxicity, many group members favored making a recommendation against the use of RCC as a toxicity measure for concentration selection. All 14 chemicals assayed for MN induction in the multi-laboratory trial were detected without exceeding 50% toxicity by any measure, but some were positive only at concentrations with toxicity quite close to 50%. The expert working group agreed to accept the cytotoxicity range recommended by OECD guideline 487 (55±5% toxicity at the top concentration scored). This also reinforces the original intent of the guidance for the in vitro chromosome aberration assay, where “>50%” was intended to target the range close to 50% toxicity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: For the assessment of genotoxic effects of cosmetic ingredients, a number of well-established and regulatory accepted in vitro assays are in place. A caveat to the use of these assays is their relatively low specificity and high rate of false or misleading positive results. Due to the 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive ban on in vivo genotoxicity testing for cosmetics that was enacted March 2009, it is no longer possible to conduct follow-up in vivo genotoxicity tests for cosmetic ingredients positive in in vitro genotoxicity tests to further assess the relevance of the in vitro findings. COLIPA, the European Cosmetics Association, has initiated a research programme to improve existing and develop new in vitro methods. A COLIPA workshop was held in Brussels in April 2008 to analyse the best possible use of available methods and approaches to enable a sound assessment of the genotoxic hazard of cosmetic ingredients. Common approaches of cosmetic companies are described, with recommendations for evaluating in vitro genotoxins using non-animal approaches. A weight of evidence approach was employed to set up a decision-tree for the integration of alternative methods into tiered testing strategies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Hair dye ingredients frequently produce positive results in short-term in vitro genotoxicity tests, although results from in vivo assays are typically negative, especially for ingredients in use today. The use of hair dyes is quite widespread resulting in the exposure both for persons working in hairdressing salons and for individuals who have their hair dyed. This provides the opportunity to add to the data from standard in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity tests by investigating whether or not genotoxic responses are detected in such exposed individuals. A number of biomonitoring studies of humans exposed to hair dyes have been conducted using either cytogenetic alterations or DNA damage as measures of genotoxicity, or urine mutagenicity as a measure of exposure to genotoxic compounds. In this paper, each study is critically reviewed and interpreted. Overall, there is no consistent evidence of genotoxicity in humans exposed to hair dyes occupationally or through individual use. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: Climbazole is an imidazole antifungal agent that can provide anti-dandruff benefits when incorporated into a shampoo matrix. A series of genotoxicity studies were performed to support the human safety of this azole antifungal drug. Climbazole was not mutagenic in the Salmonella typhimurium or Escherichia coli Ames assay and did not induce micronuclei in human lymphocytes. In the mouse lymphoma assay (MLA), climbazole was negative (non-mutagenic) with and without metabolic (S9) activation after a 4h exposure; an increase in small colony mutants was observed without metabolic activation after a 24h exposure at concentrations of 15 and 17.5μg/mL. An in vivo mouse micronucleus test was negative up to a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 150mg/kg climbazole administered orally. In the in vivo/in vitro unscheduled DNA synthesis assay, climbazole showed no evidence of DNA damage in the livers of rats at doses up to the MTD of 200mg/kg orally. A toxicokinetic study was performed in mice with oral administration of [14C]-climbazole (150mg/kg). Radioactivity (20.42μg-equiv./g plasma) was detected 15min after oral administration of [14C]-climbazole, and the peak concentration was 62.96μg-equiv./g plasma at 8h after dosing. The measured amounts of radioactivity in plasma, at all sample times from 15min up to 24h, exceeded the concentrations that induced increases in mutation frequency after 24h exposure of mouse lymphoma cells in vitro (15 and 17.5μg/mL). These observations lend support to the conclusion that climbazole does not present a genotoxic risk in vivo. Furthermore, these data are consistent with the published data for other azole antifungals that work by preventing the synthesis of ergosterol and, as a class, are generally non-genotoxic, except some isolated positive results of questionable significance. Collectively, these data are supportive of the view that climbazole does not present a genotoxic or carcinogenic risk to humans. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This study, coordinated by the SFTG (French branch of European Environmental Mutagen Society), included 38 participants from Europe, Japan and America. Clastogens (bleomycin, urethane), including base and nucleoside analogs (5-fluorouracil and cytosine arabinoside), aneugens and/or polyploidy inducers (colchicine, diethylstilboestrol, griseofulvin and thiabendazole), as well as non-genotoxic compounds (mannitol and clofibrate), were tested. Four cell types were used, i.e. human lymphocytes in the presence of cytochalasin B and CHO, CHL and L5178Y cell lines, in the presence or absence of cytochalasin B, with various treatment-recovery schedules. Mitomycin C was used as a positive control for all cell types. Mannitol and clofibrate were consistently negative in all cell types and with all treatment-recovery conditions. Urethane, known to induce questionable clastogenicity, was not found as positive. Bleomycin and mitomycin C were found positive in all treatment-recovery conditions. The base and nucleoside analogs were less easy to detect, especially 5-fluorouracil due to the interference with cytotoxicity, while cytosine arabinoside was detected in all cell types depending on the treatment-recovery schedule. Aneugens (colchicine, diethylstilboestrol and griseofulvin) were all detected in all cell types. In this study, the optimal detection was ensured when a short treatment followed by a long recovery was associated with a long continuous treatment without recovery. There was no impact of the presence or absence of cytochalasin B on the detection of micronucleated cells on cell lines. Scoring micronucleated cells in both mononucleated and binucleated cells when using cytochalasin B was confirmed to be useful for the detection and the identification of aneugens. In conclusion, these results, together with previously published validation studies, provide a useful contribution to the optimisation of a study protocol for the detection of both clastogens and aneugens in the in vitro micronucleus test. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

At the Washington “2nd International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing” (25–26 March 1999) current methodologies and data for the in vitro micronucleus test were reviewed. As a result, guidelines for the conduct of specific aspects of the protocol were developed. Agreement was achieved on the following topics: choice of cells, slide preparation, analysis of micronuclei, toxicity, use of cytochalasin-B, number of doses, and treatment/harvest times [Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 35 (2000) 167]. Because there were a number of important in vitro micronucleus validation studies in progress, it was not possible to design a definitive, internationally harmonized protocol at that time. These studies have now been completed and the data were reviewed at the Plymouth “3rd International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing” (28–29 June 2002). Data from studies coordinated by the French Society of Genetic Toxicology, Japanese collaborative studies, European pharmaceutical industry validation studies, along with data from Lilly Research Laboratories were used to prepare conclusions on the main aspects of the in vitro micronucleus protocol. In this paper, the consensus agreements on the protocol for performing the in vitro micronucleus assay are presented. The major recommendations concern:

In vitro test batteries have become the standard approach to determine the genotoxic potential of substances of interest across industry sectors. While useful for hazard identification, standard in vitro genotoxicity assays in 2D cell cultures have limited capability to predict in vivo outcomes and may trigger unnecessary follow-up animal studies or the loss of promising substances where animal tests are prohibited or not desired. To address this problem, a team of regulatory, academia and industry scientists was established to develop and validate 3D in vitro human skin-based genotoxicity assays for use in testing substances with primarily topical exposure. Validation of the reconstructed human skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay in MatTek Epi-200™ skin models involved testing 43 coded chemicals selected by independent experts, in four US/European laboratories. The results were analysed by an independent statistician according to predefined criteria. The RSMN assay showed a reproducibly low background micronucleus frequency and exhibited sufficient capacity to metabolise pro-mutagens. The overall RSMN accuracy when compared to in vivo genotoxicity outcomes was 80%, with a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 84%, and the between- and within-laboratory reproducibility was 77 and 84%, respectively. A protocol involving a 72-h exposure showed increased sensitivity in detecting true positive chemicals compared to a 48-h exposure. An analysis of a test strategy using the RSMN assay as a follow-up test for substances positive in standard in vitro clastogenicity/aneugenicity assays and a reconstructed skin Comet assay for substances with positive results in standard gene mutation assays results in a sensitivity of 89%. Based on these results, the RSMN assay is considered sufficiently validated to establish it as a 'tier 2' assay for dermally exposed compounds and was recently accepted into the OECD's test guideline development program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • In vivo comet assay compared with transgenic rodent assay for 91 chemicals. • Comparison focussed on evaluation of in vivo genotoxicity per se. • Fair to good agreement between assays in GI tract (stomach and colon) and liver. • Poor to no agreement between assays in bone marrow. Abstract A database of 91 chemicals with published data from both transgenic rodent mutation (TGR) and rodent comet assays has been compiled. The objective was to compare the sensitivity of the two assays for detecting genotoxicity. Critical aspects of study design and results were tabulated for each dataset. There were fewer datasets from rats than mice, particularly for the TGR assay, and therefore, results from both species were combined for further analysis. TGR and comet responses were compared in liver and bone marrow (the most commonly studied tissues), and in stomach and colon evaluated either separately or in combination with other GI tract segments. Overall positive, negative, or equivocal test results were assessed for each chemical across the tissues examined in the TGR and comet assays using two approaches: 1) overall calls based on weight of evidence (WoE) and expert judgement, and 2) curation of the data based on a priori acceptability criteria prior to deriving final tissue specific calls. Since the database contains a high prevalence of positive results, overall agreement between the assays was determined using statistics adjusted for prevalence (using AC1 and PABAK). These coefficients showed fair or moderate to good agreement for liver and the GI tract (predominantly stomach and colon data) using WoE, reduced agreement for stomach and colon evaluated separately using data curation, and poor or no agreement for bone marrow using both the WoE and data curation approaches. Confidence in these results is higher for liver than for the other tissues, for which there were less data. Our analysis finds that comet and TGR generally identify the same compounds (mainly potent mutagens) as genotoxic in liver, stomach and colon, but not in bone marrow. However, the current database content precluded drawing assay concordance conclusions for weak mutagens and non-DNA reactive chemicals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The in vitro human reconstructed skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay in EpiDerm™ is a promising novel animal alternative for evaluating genotoxicity of topically applied chemicals. It is particularly useful for assessing cosmetic ingredients that can no longer be tested using in vivo assays. To advance the use of this test especially for regulatory decision-making, we have established the RSMN assay in our laboratory according to Good Laboratory Practice and following the principles of the OECD test guideline 487 in vitro mammalian cell micronucleus test. Proficiency with the assay was established by correctly identifying direct-acting genotoxins and genotoxins requiring metabolism, as well as non-genotoxic/non-carcinogenic chemicals. We also report the analysis of our historical control data that demonstrate vehicle control and positive control values for %micronuclei in binucleated cells are in the ranges reported previously. Technical issues including evaluating various solvents with both 48 h and 72 h treatment regimens were investigated. For the first time, mechanistic studies using CREST analysis revealed that the RSMN assay is suitable for distinguishing aneugens and clastogens. Moreover, the assay is also suitable for measuring cytokines as markers for proliferative and toxic effects of chemicals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the international validation study of the in vivo rat alkaline comet assay (comet assay), the Japanese Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (JaCVAM) provided three coded chemicals to BioReliance, 1,3-dichloropropene, ethionamide and busulfan, to be tested in a combined in vivo comet/micronucleus assay. Induction of DNA damage (comet) in liver, stomach and jejunum (1,3-dichloropropene only) cells, and induction of MNPCEs in bone marrow, were examined in male Sprague–Dawley (Hsd:SD) rats following oral administration of the test chemical for three consecutive days. A dose range finding (DRF) test was performed with each chemical to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Based on the results of the DRF test; 1,3-dichloropropene was tested at 50, 100 and 200 mg/kg/day; ethionamide was tested at 125, 250 and 500 mg/kg/day, and busulfan was tested at 10, 20 and 40 mg/kg/day. The results indicated that 1,3-dichloropropene induced DNA damage only in liver cells at all three test article doses, while no effects were observed in the stomach and jejunum cells. Additionally, it did not increase MNPCEs in the bone marrow. 1,3-Dichloropropene was concluded to be negative in the MN assay but positive in the comet assay. Ethionamide did not induce DNA damage in liver. However, in stomach, statistically significant decreases (although still within historical range) in % tail DNA at all test article doses compared to the vehicle control were observed. There was no increase in MNPCEs in the bone marrow. Thus, ethionamide was concluded to be negative in the comet/MN combined assay. Busulfan did not induce DNA damage in any of the organs tested (liver and stomach) but it did induce a significant increase in MNPCEs in the bone marrow. Busulfan was concluded to be negative in the comet assay but positive in the MN assay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A working group convened at the 2009 5th IWGT to discuss possibilities for improving in vivo genotoxicity assessment by investigating possible links to standard toxicity testing. The working group considered: (1) combination of acute micronucleus (MN) and Comet assays into a single study, (2) integration of MN assays into repeated-dose toxicity (RDT) studies, (3) integration of Comet assays into RDT studies, and (4) requirements for the top dose when integrating genotoxicity measurements into RDT studies. The working group reviewed current requirements for in vivo genotoxicity testing of different chemical product classes and identified opportunities for combination and integration of genotoxicity endpoints for each class. The combination of the acute in vivo MN and Comet assays was considered by the working group to represent a technically feasible and scientifically acceptable alternative to conducting independent assays. Two combination protocols, consisting of either a 3- or a 4-treament protocol, were considered equally acceptable. As the integration of MN assays into RDT studies had already been discussed in detail in previous IWGT meetings, the working group focussed on factors that could affect the results of the integrated MN assay, such as the possible effects of repeated bleeding and the need for early harvests. The working group reached the consensus that repeated bleeding at reasonable volumes is not a critical confounding factor for the MN assay in rats older than 9 weeks of age and that rats bled for toxicokinetic investigations or for other routine toxicological purposes can be used for MN analysis. The working group considered the available data as insufficient to conclude that there is a need for an early sampling point for MN analysis in RDT studies, in addition to the routine determination at terminal sacrifice. Specific scenarios were identified where an additional early sampling can have advantages, e.g., for compounds that exert toxic effects on hematopoiesis, including some aneugens. For the integration of Comet assays into RDT studies, the working group reached the consensus that, based upon the limited amount of data available, integration is scientifically acceptable and that the liver Comet assay can complement the MN assay in blood or bone marrow in detecting in vivo genotoxins. Practical issues need to be considered when conducting an integrated Comet assay study. Freezing of tissue samples for later Comet assay analysis could alleviate logistical problems. However, the working group concluded that freezing of tissue samples can presently not be recommended for routine use, although it was noted that results from some laboratories look promising. Another discussion topic centred around the question as to whether tissue toxicity, which is more likely observed in RDT than in acute toxicity studies, would affect the results of the Comet assay. Based on the available data from in vivo studies, the working group concluded that there are no clear examples where cytotoxicity, by itself, generates increases or decreases in DNA migration. The working group identified the need for a refined guidance on the use and interpretation of cytotoxicity methods used in the Comet assay, as the different methods used generally lead to inconsistent conclusions. Since top doses in RDT studies often are limited by toxicity that occurs only after several doses, the working group discussed whether the sensitivity of integrated genotoxicity studies is reduced under these circumstances. For compounds for which in vitro genotoxicity studies yielded negative results, the working group reached the consensus that integration of in vivo genotoxicity endpoints (typically the MN assay) into RDT studies is generally acceptable. If in vitro genotoxicity results are unavailable or positive, consensus was reached that the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is acceptable as the top dose in RDT studies in many cases, such as when the RDT study MTD or exposure is close (50% or greater) to an acute study MTD or exposure. Finally, the group agreed that exceptions to this general rule might be acceptable, for example when human exposure is lower than the preclinical exposure by a large margin. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The European Cosmetic Toiletry and Perfumery Association (COLIPA), along with contributions from the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), initiated a multi-lab international prevalidation project on the reconstructed skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay in EpiDerm™ for the assessment of the genotoxicity of dermally applied chemicals. The first step of this project was to standardize the protocol and transfer it to laboratories that had not performed the assay before. Here we describe in detail the protocol for the RSMN assay in EpiDerm™ and the harmonized guidelines for scoring, with an atlas of cell images. We also describe factors that can influence the performance of the assay. Use of these methods will help new laboratories to conduct the assay, thereby further increasing the database for this promising new in vitro genotoxicity test. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The toxicological relevance of the micronucleus (MN) test is well defined: it is a multi-target genotoxic endpoint, assessing not only clastogenic and aneugenic events but also some epigenetic effects, which is simple to score, accurate, applicable in different cell types. In addition, it is predictive for cancer, amenable for automation and allows good extrapolation for potential limits of exposure or thresholds and it is easily measured in experimental both in vitro and in vivo systems. Implementation of in vitro micronucleus (IVMN) assays in the battery of tests for hazard and risk assessment of potential mutagens/carcinogens is therefore fully justified. Moreover, the final draft of an OECD guideline became recently available for this test. In this review, we discuss the prerequisites for an acceptable MN assay, including the cell as unit of observation, importance of cell membranes, the requirement of a mitotic or meiotic division and the assessment of cell division in the presence of the test substance. Furthermore, the importance of adequate design of protocols is highlighted and new developments, in particular the in vitro 3D human skin models, are discussed. Finally, we address future research perspectives including the possibility of a combined primary 3D human skin and primary human whole blood culture system, and the need for adaptation of the IVMN assays to assess the genotoxic potential of new materials, in particular nanomaterials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: To address the provision of the 7th Amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive banning the use of in vivo genotoxicity assays for testing cosmetic ingredients in 2009, the 3D EpiDerm™ reconstructed human skin micronucleus assay has been developed. To further characterise the EpiDerm™ tissue for potential use in genotoxicity testing, we have evaluated the dermal penetration and metabolism of two hair dye ingredients, p-aminophenol (PAP) and p-phenylenediamine (PPD) in this reconstructed epidermis model. When EpiDerm™ tissue was topically exposed to PAP or PPD for 30min (typical for a hair dye exposure), the majority (80–>90%) of PAP or PPD was excluded from skin tissue and removed by rinsing. After a 23.5h recovery period, the PAP fraction that did penetrate was completely N-acetylated to acetaminophen (APAP). Similarly, 30min topical application of PPD resulted in the formation of the N-mono- and N,N′-diacetylated metabolites of PPD. These results are consistent with published data on the dermal metabolism of these compounds from other in vitro systems as well as from in vivo studies. When tissue was exposed topically (PAP) or via the culture media (PPD) for 24h, there was good batch-to-batch and donor-to-donor reproducibility in the penetration and metabolism of PAP and PPD. Overall, the results demonstrate that these two aromatic amines are biotransformed in 3D EpiDerm™ tissue via N-acetylation. Characterising the metabolic capability of EpiDerm™ tissue is important for the evaluation of this model for use in genotoxicity testing. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: A novel in vitro human reconstructed skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay has been developed using the EpiDerm™ 3D human skin model [R. D. Curren, G. C. Mun, D. P. Gibson, and M. J. Aardema, Development of a method for assessing micronucleus induction in a 3D human skin model EpiDerm™, Mutat. Res. 607 (2006) 192–204]. The RSMN assay has potential use in genotoxicity assessments as a replacement for in vivo genotoxicity assays that will be banned starting in 2009 according to the EU 7th Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive. Utilizing EpiDerm™ tissues reconstructed with cells from four different donors, intralaboratory and interlaboratory reproducibility of the RSMN assay were examined. Seven chemicals were evaluated in three laboratories using a standard protocol. Each chemical was evaluated in at least two laboratories and in EpiDerm™ tissues from at least two different donors. Three model genotoxins, mitomycin C (MMC), vinblastine sulfate (VB) and methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) induced significant, dose-related increases in cytotoxicity and MN induction in EpiDerm™ tissues. Conversely, four dermal non-carcinogens, 4-nitrophenol (4-NP), trichloroethylene (TCE), 2-ethyl-1,3-hexanediol (EHD), and 1,2-epoxydodecane (EDD) were negative in the RSMN assay. Results between tissues reconstructed from different donors were comparable. These results indicate the RSMN assay using the EpiDerm™ 3D human skin model is a promising new in vitro genotoxicity assay that allows evaluation of chromosome damage following “in vivo-like” dermal exposures. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Workshop participants agreed that genotoxicity tests in mammalian cells in vitro produce a remarkably high and unacceptable occurrence of irrelevant positive results (e.g. when compared with rodent carcinogenicity). As reported in several recent reviews, the rate of irrelevant positives (i.e. low specificity) for some studies using in vitro methods (when compared to this “gold standard”) means that an increased number of test articles are subjected to additional in vivo genotoxicity testing, in many cases before, e.g. the efficacy (in the case of pharmaceuticals) of the compound has been evaluated. If in vitro tests were more predictive for in vivo genotoxicity and carcinogenicity (i.e. fewer false positives) then there would be a significant reduction in the number of animals used. Beyond animal (or human) carcinogenicity as the “gold standard”, it is acknowledged that genotoxicity tests provide much information about cellular behaviour, cell division processes and cellular fate to a (geno)toxic insult. Since the disease impact of these effects is seldom known, and a verification of relevant toxicity is normally also the subject of (sub)chronic animal studies, the prediction of in vivo relevant results from in vitro genotoxicity tests is also important for aspects that may not have a direct impact on carcinogenesis as the ultimate endpoint of concern. In order to address the high rate of in vitro false positive results, a 2-day workshop was held at the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), Ispra, Italy in April 2006. More than 20 genotoxicity experts from academia, government and industry were invited to review data from the currently available cell systems, to discuss whether there exist cells and test systems that have a reduced tendency to false positive results, to review potential modifications to existing protocols and cell systems that might result in improved specificity, and to review the performance of some new test systems that show promise of improved specificity without sacrificing sensitivity. It was concluded that better guidance on the likely mechanisms resulting in positive results that are not biologically relevant for human health, and how to obtain evidence for those mechanisms, is needed both for practitioners and regulatory reviewers. Participants discussed the fact that cell lines commonly used for genotoxicity testing have a number of deficiencies that may contribute to the high false positive rate. These include, amongst others, lack of normal metabolism leading to reliance on exogenous metabolic activation systems (e.g. Aroclor-induced rat S9), impaired p53 function and altered DNA repair capability. The high concentrations of test chemicals (i.e. 10mM or 5000μg/ml, unless precluded by solubility or excessive toxicity) and the high levels of cytotoxicity currently required in mammalian cell genotoxicity tests were discussed as further potential sources of false positive results. Even if the goal is to detect carcinogens with short in vitro tests under more or less acute conditions, it does not seem logical to exceed the capabilities of cellular metabolic turnover, activation and defence processes. The concept of “promiscuous activation” was discussed. For numerous mutagens, the decisive in vivo enzymes are missing in vitro. However, if the substrate concentration is increased sufficiently, some other enzymes (that are unimportant in vivo) may take over the activation—leading to the same or a different active metabolite. Since we often do not use the right enzyme systems for positive controls in vitro, we have to rely on their promiscuous activation, i.e. to use excessive concentrations to get an empirical correlation between genotoxicity and carcinogenicity. A thorough review of published and industry data is urgently needed to determine whether the currently required limit concentration of 10mM or 5000μg/ml, and high levels of cytotoxicity, are necessary for the detection of in vivo genotoxins and DNA-reactive, mutagenic carcinogens. In addition, various measures of cytotoxicity are currently allowable under OECD test guidelines, but there are few comparative data on whether different measures would result in different maximum concentrations for testing. A detailed comparison of cytotoxicity assessment strategies is needed. An assessment of whether test endpoints can be selected that are not intrinsically associated with cytotoxicity, and therefore are less susceptible to artefacts produced by cytotoxicity, should also be undertaken. There was agreement amongst the workshop participants that cell systems which are p53 and DNA-repair proficient, and have defined Phase 1 and Phase 2 metabolism, covering a broad set of enzyme forms, and used within the context of appropriately set limits of concentration and cytotoxicity, offer the best hope for reduced false positives. Whilst there is some evidence that human lymphocytes are less susceptible to false positives than the current rodent cell lines, other cell systems based on HepG2, TK6 and MCL-5 cells, as well as 3D skin models based on primary human keratinocytes also show some promise. Other human cell lines such as HepaRG, and human stem cells (the target for carcinogenicity) have not been used for genotoxicity investigations and should be considered for evaluation. Genetic engineering is also a valuable tool to incorporate missing enzyme systems into target cells. A collaborative research programme is needed to identify, further develop and evaluate new cell systems with appropriate sensitivity but improved specificity. In order to review current data for selection of appropriate top concentrations, measures and levels of cytotoxicity, metabolism, and to be able to improve existing or validate new assay systems, the participants called for the establishment of an expert group to identify the in vivo genotoxins and DNA-reactive, mutagenic carcinogens that we expect our in vitro genotoxicity assays to detect as well as the non-genotoxins and non-carcinogens we expect them not to detect. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: To meet the requirements of the EU 7th Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive, manufacturers of cosmetics products will need to ascertain the safety of ingredients using non-animal methods. Starting in 2009, in vivo genotoxicity tests for cosmetics ingredients will not be allowed. Skin is a target area of interest for many cosmetic products because of its relatively high exposure. Therefore, it would be beneficial to have a non-animal, skin-based genotoxicity assay, especially one that utilized human skin in vitro. In this paper, we describe the development of a reproducible micronucleus assay that uses EpiDerm™ engineered human skin constructs (MatTek Corp., Ashland, MA). We describe methods for isolating single cells from the 3D skin model and for processing the cells for microscopic analysis of micronuclei (MN). In addition, since little was known about the kinetics of the dividing keratinocytes in the EpiDerm™ model, we evaluated whether cytochalasin B (Cyt-B) could be used to distinguish the population of dividing cells allowing the development of a micronucleus assay in binucleated cells. We found that the frequency of binucleated cells increased both with time and with increasing concentration of Cyt-B. After a 48-h exposure, 30–50% binucleated cells were reproducibly obtained. Finally, we evaluated micronucleus induction using the model genotoxicants mitomycin C (MMC) and vinblastine sulfate (VB). The background frequency of MN is very low and reproducible in this model, and statistically significant increases in the frequency of micronucleated cells were induced by both MMC and VB. These are initial steps in developing a routine “in vivo-like” assay for chromosomal damage in human tissue. It is hoped that other investigators utilize these methods to further the understanding of this potentially valuable new non-animal method. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

During the safety evaluation process of new drugs and chemicals, a battery of genotoxicity tests is conducted starting with in vitro genotoxicity assays. Obtaining positive results in in vitro genotoxicity tests is not uncommon. Follow-up studies to determine the biological relevance of positive genotoxicity results are costly, time consuming, and utilize animals. More efficient methods, especially for identifying a putative mode of action like an indirect mechanism of genotoxicity (where DNA molecules are not the initial primary targets), would greatly improve the risk assessment for genotoxins. To this end, we are participating in an International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) project involving studies of gene expression changes caused by model genotoxins. The purpose of the work is to evaluate gene expression tools in general, and specifically for discriminating genotoxins that are direct-acting from indirect-acting. Our lab has evaluated gene expression changes as well as micronuclei (MN) in L5178Y TK+/− mouse lymphoma cells treated with six compounds. Direct-acting genotoxins (where DNA is the initial primary target) that were evaluated included the DNA crosslinking agents, mitomycin C (MMC) and cisplatin (CIS), and an alkylating agent, methyl methanesulfonate (MMS). Indirect-acting genotoxins included hydroxyurea (HU), a ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor, taxol (TXL), a microtubule inhibitor, and etoposide (ETOP), a DNA topoisomerase II inhibitor. Microarray gene expression analysis was conducted using Affymetrix mouse oligonucleotide arrays on RNA samples derived from cells which were harvested immediately after the 4 h chemical treatment, and 20 h after the 4 h chemical treatment. The evaluation of these experimental results yields evidence of differentially regulated genes at both 4 and 24 h time points that appear to have discriminating power for direct versus indirect genotoxins, and therefore may serve as a fingerprint for classifying chemicals when their mechanism of action is unknown. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]