Parfett Craig L, Desaulniers Daniel
Mechanistic Studies Division, Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau,HealthyEnvironments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, 50 Columbine Driveway,Tunney's Pasture, Ottawa, ON K1A 0K9, Canada.
Hazard Identification Division, Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau,HealthyEnvironments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, 50 Columbine Driveway,Tunney's Pasture, Ottawa, ON K1A 0K9, Canada.
Int J Mol Sci. 2017 Jun 1;18(6):1179. doi: 10.3390/ijms18061179.
An emerging vision for toxicity testing in the 21st century foresees in vitro assays assuming the leading role in testing for chemical hazards, including testing for carcinogenicity. Toxicity will be determined by monitoring key steps in functionally validated molecular pathways, using tests designed to reveal chemically-induced perturbations that lead to adverse phenotypic endpoints in cultured human cells. Risk assessments would subsequently be derived from the causal in vitro endpoints and concentration vs. effect data extrapolated to human in vivo concentrations. Much direct experimental evidence now shows that disruption of epigenetic processes by chemicals is a carcinogenic mode of action that leads to altered gene functions playing causal roles in cancer initiation and progression. In assessing chemical safety, it would therefore be advantageous to consider an emerging class of carcinogens, the epigenotoxicants, with the ability to change chromatin and/or DNA marks by direct or indirect effects on the activities of enzymes (writers, erasers/editors, remodelers and readers) that convey the epigenetic information. Evidence is reviewed supporting a strategy for in vitro hazard identification of carcinogens that induce toxicity through disturbance of functional epigenetic pathways in human somatic cells, leading to inactivated tumour suppressor genes and carcinogenesis. In the context of human cell transformation models, these in vitro pathway measurements ensure high biological relevance to the apical endpoint of cancer. Four causal mechanisms participating in pathways to persistent epigenetic gene silencing were considered: covalent histone modification, nucleosome remodeling, non-coding RNA interaction and DNA methylation. Within these four interacting mechanisms, 25 epigenetic toxicity pathway components (SET1, MLL1, KDM5, G9A, SUV39H1, SETDB1, EZH2, JMJD3, CBX7, CBX8, BMI, SUZ12, HP1, MPP8, DNMT1, DNMT3A, DNMT3B, TET1, MeCP2, SETDB2, BAZ2A, UHRF1, CTCF, HOTAIR and ANRIL) were found to have experimental evidence showing that functional perturbations played "driver" roles in human cellular transformation. Measurement of epigenotoxicants presents challenges for short-term carcinogenicity testing, especially in the high-throughput modes emphasized in the Tox21 chemicals testing approach. There is need to develop and validate in vitro tests to detect both, locus-specific, and genome-wide, epigenetic alterations with causal links to oncogenic cellular phenotypes. Some recent examples of cell-based high throughput chemical screening assays are presented that have been applied or have shown potential for application to epigenetic endpoints.
21世纪毒性测试的一个新愿景预计,体外试验将在化学危害测试(包括致癌性测试)中发挥主导作用。毒性将通过监测功能验证的分子途径中的关键步骤来确定,使用旨在揭示化学诱导的扰动的测试,这些扰动会导致培养的人类细胞中出现不良表型终点。随后的风险评估将来自因果性的体外终点以及外推至人体体内浓度的浓度与效应数据。现在有许多直接实验证据表明,化学物质对表观遗传过程的破坏是一种致癌作用模式,会导致在癌症发生和发展中起因果作用的基因功能改变。因此,在评估化学安全性时,考虑一类新兴的致癌物——表观遗传毒性物质是有利的,这类物质能够通过直接或间接影响传递表观遗传信息的酶(写入者、擦除者/编辑者、重塑者和读取者)的活性来改变染色质和/或DNA标记。本文综述了相关证据,支持一种在体外识别通过干扰人类体细胞中功能性表观遗传途径诱导毒性从而导致肿瘤抑制基因失活和致癌的致癌物的策略。在人类细胞转化模型的背景下,这些体外途径测量确保了与癌症顶端终点具有高度生物学相关性。研究考虑了参与持续性表观遗传基因沉默途径的四种因果机制:共价组蛋白修饰、核小体重塑、非编码RNA相互作用和DNA甲基化。在这四种相互作用机制中,发现有25种表观遗传毒性途径成分(SET1、MLL1、KDM5、G9A、SUV39H1、SETDB1、EZH2、JMJD3、CBX7、CBX8、BMI、SUZ12、HP1、MPP8 DNMT1、DNMT3A、DNMT3B、TET1、MeCP2、SETDB2、BAZ2A、UHRF1、CTCF、HOTAIR和ANRIL)有实验证据表明其功能扰动在人类细胞转化中起“驱动”作用。表观遗传毒性物质的测量对短期致癌性测试提出了挑战尤其是在Tox21化学物质测试方法所强调的高通量模式下。需要开发和验证体外试验,以检测与致癌细胞表型有因果联系的位点特异性和全基因组表观遗传改变。本文介绍了一些基于细胞的高通量化学筛选试验的最新例子,这些试验已应用于或显示出应用于表观遗传终点的潜力。