Litron Laboratories, Rochester, New York.
Toxicology Consulting Services, Bonita Springs, Florida.
Environ Mol Mutagen. 2019 Oct;60(8):704-739. doi: 10.1002/em.22312. Epub 2019 Jul 26.
Regulatory guidance documents stress the value of assessing the most appropriate endpoints in multiple tissues when evaluating the in vivo genotoxic potential of chemicals. However, conducting several independent studies to evaluate multiple endpoints and/or tissue compartments is resource intensive. Furthermore, when dependent on visual detection, conventional approaches for scoring genotoxicity endpoints can be slow, tedious, and less objective than the ideal. To address these issues with current practices we attempted to (1) devise resource sparing treatment and harvest schedules that are compatible with liver and blood micronucleus endpoints, as well as the Pig-a gene mutation assay, and (2) utilize flow cytometry-based methods to score each of these genotoxicity biomarkers. Proof-of-principle experiments were performed with 4-week-old male and female Crl:CD(SD) rats exposed to aristolochic acids I/II, benzo[a]pyrene, cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, diethylnitrosamine, 1,2-dimethylhydrazine, dimethylnitrosamine, 2,6-dinitrotoluene, hydroxyurea, melphalan, temozolomide, quinoline, or vinblastine. These 13 chemicals were each tested in two treatment regimens: one 3-day exposure cycle, and three 3-day exposure cycles. Each exposure, blood collection, and liver harvest was accomplished during a standard Monday-Friday workweek. Key findings are that even these well-studied, relatively potent genotoxicants were not active in both tissues and all assays (indeed only cisplatin was clearly positive in all three assays); and whereas the sensitivity of the Pig-a assay clearly benefitted from three versus one treatment cycle, micronucleus assays yielded qualitatively similar results across both study designs. Collectively, these results suggest it is possible to significantly reduce animal and other resource requirements while improving assessments of in vivo genotoxicity potential by simultaneously evaluating three endpoints and two important tissue compartments using fit-for-purpose study designs in conjunction with flow cytometric scoring approaches. Environ. Mol. Mutagen., 60:704-739, 2019. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
监管指导文件强调,在评估化学物质的体内遗传毒性时,评估多种组织中最合适的终点具有重要价值。然而,进行多项独立研究以评估多个终点和/或组织隔室需要大量资源。此外,当依赖于视觉检测时,传统的遗传毒性终点评分方法可能既缓慢、繁琐,又不如理想方法客观。为了解决当前实践中的这些问题,我们尝试:(1)设计资源节约型的处理和收获方案,这些方案与肝脏和血液微核终点以及 Pig-a 基因突变检测兼容;(2)利用基于流式细胞术的方法对这些遗传毒性生物标志物进行评分。使用 4 周龄雄性和雌性 Crl:CD(SD)大鼠进行原理验证实验,这些大鼠暴露于马兜铃酸 I/II、苯并[a]芘、顺铂、环磷酰胺、二乙基亚硝胺、1,2-二甲基肼、二甲基亚硝胺、2,6-二硝基甲苯、羟基脲、美法仑、替莫唑胺、喹啉或长春碱。这 13 种化学物质分别采用两种处理方案进行测试:一种是 3 天暴露周期,另一种是 3 天暴露周期。每个暴露、采血和肝脏收获都是在标准的周一至周五工作日完成的。主要发现是,即使是这些经过充分研究的、相对有效的遗传毒物,在两种组织和所有检测中也并非都有活性(实际上,只有顺铂在所有三种检测中都明显呈阳性);而且,尽管 Pig-a 检测的敏感性显然得益于三个而非一个处理周期,但微核检测在两种研究设计中都产生了类似的定性结果。总的来说,这些结果表明,通过同时使用适合目的的研究设计和流式细胞术评分方法,评估三种终点和两个重要组织隔室,同时可以显著减少动物和其他资源的需求,提高体内遗传毒性潜力的评估。环境分子突变,60:704-739,2019。©2019 威利父子公司。