Harbach P R, Wiser S K, Smith A L, Grzegorczyk C R, Aaron C S
Genetic Toxicology Research, Upjohn Company, Kalamazoo, MI 49007.
Mutat Res. 1991 Apr;252(2):149-55. doi: 10.1016/0165-1161(91)90015-z.
The unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS) assay measures DNA repair following in vitro treatment of rat primary hepatocytes. This report compares the UDS response of primary hepatocytes from 2 widely used rat strains, the Fischer-344 (F344) and Sprague-Dawley (SD) strains. Ultraviolet (UV) light and 5 known genotoxic chemicals were evaluated in each strain in parallel experiments. The chemicals tested were 2-acetylaminofluorene (2-AAF), 4-aminobiphenyl (4-AB), benzidine, dimethylnitrosamine (DMN) and N-propyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine (PNNG). Four of these compounds (2-AAF, 4-AB, benzidine and DMN) require metabolic activation. Benzidine and PNNG were both negative using SD rat hepatocytes, but were weakly positive using F344 rat hepatocytes. In the first of 2 experiments, 4-AB was inconclusive in SD hepatocytes, but strongly positive in F344 cells. In the second experiment, 4-AB was positive in hepatocytes from both strains. 2-AAF was more strongly positive in F344 cells than in SD cells. DMN and UV light induced positive dose responses with little or no differences between strains. It is concluded that hepatocytes from F344 rats may be more sensitive, qualitatively and quantitatively, than hepatocytes from SD rats as indicators of UDS. This difference is not due to intrinsic differences in DNA repair mechanisms but is probably due to differences in drug-metabolizing enzymes between these strains. Thus, for routine screening, F344 rats are preferable for measurement of the in vitro UDS-inducing potential of compounds.
非程序性DNA合成(UDS)试验用于检测大鼠原代肝细胞经体外处理后的DNA修复情况。本报告比较了两种广泛使用的大鼠品系——Fischer-344(F344)和Sprague-Dawley(SD)品系原代肝细胞的UDS反应。在平行实验中,对每个品系的肝细胞进行了紫外线(UV)照射和5种已知的基因毒性化学物质的评估。所测试的化学物质为2-乙酰氨基芴(2-AAF)、4-氨基联苯(4-AB)、联苯胺、二甲基亚硝胺(DMN)和N-丙基-N'-硝基-N-亚硝基胍(PNNG)。其中4种化合物(2-AAF、4-AB、联苯胺和DMN)需要代谢激活。使用SD大鼠肝细胞时,联苯胺和PNNG均为阴性,但使用F344大鼠肝细胞时呈弱阳性。在两个实验中的第一个实验中,4-AB在SD肝细胞中的结果不确定,但在F344细胞中呈强阳性。在第二个实验中,4-AB在两个品系的肝细胞中均呈阳性。2-AAF在F344细胞中的阳性反应比在SD细胞中更强。DMN和紫外线诱导的阳性剂量反应在品系之间几乎没有差异。结论是,作为UDS指标,F344大鼠的肝细胞在定性和定量方面可能比SD大鼠的肝细胞更敏感。这种差异不是由于DNA修复机制的内在差异,而可能是由于这些品系之间药物代谢酶的差异。因此,对于常规筛选,F344大鼠更适合用于测量化合物的体外UDS诱导潜力。