AbbVie, Inc., 1 North Waukegan Road, North Chicago, IL, USA.
MilliporeSigma BioReliance(®) Toxicology Services, 9630, Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, USA.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2018 Dec;100:134-160. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.10.005. Epub 2018 Oct 26.
The bacterial reverse mutation assay (Ames) is a fundamental genetic toxicology test, and efforts to miniaturize the regulatory GLP version are essential in assessing genotoxic liabilities earlier in the drug development pipeline. Two versions of the Ames were compared: the six-well (miniaturized) plate and the standard 100-mm plate test at two different laboratories. Of twenty-four chemicals tested, a subset of six chemicals was tested in the six-well test only and the remaining eighteen were evaluated in both versions of the test. The plate incorporation procedure was used with one Escherichia coli and four different Salmonella strains. The six-well test uses the same plating procedure and evaluation methods as the standard Ames assay in 100-mm plates, but the smaller format requires 20% of the test chemical. Additionally, the six-well test uses a limit concentration of 1000 μg/well versus the standard Petri plate test limit concentration of 5000 μg/plate. Testing across the two formats resulted in 100% concordance in overall mutagenicity judgement and 94% concordance across all tester strains and conditions. Known mutagenic positive control chemicals were correctly detected as positive in both formats. The overall conclusion is that the six-well assay results are concordant with the standard assay format in this evaluation and could be a reliable alternative.
细菌回复突变检测(Ames)是一种基本的遗传毒理学检测方法,为了在药物开发早期评估遗传毒性风险,有必要对监管 GLP 版本进行微型化。本研究对两种 Ames 版本进行了比较:在两个不同的实验室中,六孔板(微型化)和标准 100mm 板检测。在 24 种测试的化学物质中,有 6 种化学物质仅在六孔板检测中进行了测试,其余 18 种化学物质则在两种检测版本中进行了评估。平板掺入程序采用了一种大肠杆菌和四种不同的沙门氏菌菌株。六孔板检测使用与标准 100mm 板中的 Ames 检测相同的平板程序和评估方法,但较小的格式仅需要 20%的测试化学物质。此外,六孔板检测使用的限制浓度为 1000μg/孔,而标准 Petri 板检测的限制浓度为 5000μg/板。两种检测格式的测试结果在总体致突变性判断上完全一致,在所有测试菌株和条件下的一致性为 94%。两种检测格式均正确地检测到已知的致突变阳性对照化学物质。总的来说,在本评估中,六孔板检测的结果与标准检测格式一致,并且可能是一种可靠的替代方法。