Institute of Life Science, Swansea School of Medicine, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea SA28PP, United Kingdom.
Toxicology. 2010 Dec 30;278(3):305-10. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2009.11.016. Epub 2009 Nov 22.
It has been long assumed that DNA damage is induced in a linear manner with respect to the dose of a direct acting genotoxin. Thus, it is implied that direct acting genotoxic agents induce DNA damage at even the lowest of concentrations and that no "safe" dose range exists. The linear (non-threshold) paradigm has led to the one-hit model being developed. This "one hit" scenario can be interpreted such that a single DNA damaging event in a cell has the capability to induce a single point mutation in that cell which could (if positioned in a key growth controlling gene) lead to increased proliferation, leading ultimately to the formation of a tumour. There are many groups (including our own) who, for a decade or more, have argued, that low dose exposures to direct acting genotoxins may be tolerated by cells through homeostatic mechanisms such as DNA repair. This argument stems from the existence of evolutionary adaptive mechanisms that allow organisms to adapt to low levels of exogenous sources of genotoxins. We have been particularly interested in the genotoxic effects of known mutagens at low dose exposures in human cells and have identified for the first time, in vitro genotoxic thresholds for several mutagenic alkylating agents (Doak et al., 2007). Our working hypothesis is that DNA repair is primarily responsible for these thresholded effects at low doses by removing low levels of DNA damage but becoming saturated at higher doses. We are currently assessing the roles of base excision repair (BER) and methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) for roles in the identified thresholds (Doak et al., 2008). This research area is currently important as it assesses whether "safe" exposure levels to mutagenic chemicals can exist and allows risk assessment using appropriate safety factors to define such exposure levels. Given human variation, the mechanistic basis for genotoxic thresholds (e.g. DNA repair) has to be well defined in order that susceptible individuals are considered. In terms of industrial exposures to known mutagens, knowing the dose relationships and protective mechanisms involved, offers the possibility of screening workers for susceptibility to mutation through examining DNA repair gene polymorphisms. Hence, thresholds may exist for certain mutagens, but there will undoubtedly be human subpopulations who are more at risk from low dose exposures than others and who should not be exposed, if possible. By studying polymorphisms in DNA repair genes, susceptible individuals may be identified, and additional safety factors appropriately targeted to these populations.
长期以来,人们一直认为 DNA 损伤是在线性方式下与直接作用的遗传毒物的剂量相关的。因此,这意味着直接作用的遗传毒物在即使是最低浓度下也会诱导 DNA 损伤,而且不存在“安全”的剂量范围。线性(无阈值)范式导致了单击中模型的发展。这种“单一打击”的情况可以解释为单个细胞中的单个 DNA 损伤事件有能力在该细胞中诱导单个点突变,如果该点突变位于关键的生长控制基因中,可能导致细胞增殖增加,最终导致肿瘤的形成。许多研究小组(包括我们自己的研究小组)已经争论了十多年,认为细胞可以通过 DNA 修复等体内平衡机制来耐受低剂量的直接作用遗传毒物。这种论点源于这样一种观点,即存在进化适应性机制,使生物体能够适应低水平的外源遗传毒物。我们特别关注已知诱变剂在人类细胞中的低剂量暴露的遗传毒性效应,并首次在体外确定了几种致突变烷化剂的遗传毒性阈值(Doak 等人,2007 年)。我们的工作假设是,DNA 修复主要负责这些低剂量的阈值效应,通过清除低水平的 DNA 损伤,但在高剂量时会饱和。我们目前正在评估碱基切除修复(BER)和甲基鸟嘌呤-DNA 甲基转移酶(MGMT)在鉴定的阈值中的作用(Doak 等人,2008 年)。这个研究领域目前很重要,因为它评估了是否存在对诱变剂的“安全”暴露水平,并允许使用适当的安全系数来定义这种暴露水平进行风险评估。考虑到人类的变异性,必须明确遗传毒性阈值的机制基础(例如 DNA 修复),以便考虑易受影响的个体。就已知诱变剂的工业暴露而言,了解涉及的剂量关系和保护机制,为通过检查 DNA 修复基因多态性筛选对突变敏感的工人提供了可能性。因此,某些诱变剂可能存在阈值,但毫无疑问,某些人群比其他人更容易受到低剂量暴露的影响,而且如果可能的话,这些人不应暴露于诱变剂。通过研究 DNA 修复基因的多态性,可以鉴定出易受影响的个体,并将额外的安全因素有针对性地针对这些人群。