Madle S, Dean S W, Andrae U, Brambilla G, Burlinson B, Doolittle D J, Furihata C, Hertner T, McQueen C A, Mori H
Federal Health Office, Max von Pettenkofer-Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Mutat Res. 1994 Jun;312(3):263-85. doi: 10.1016/0165-1161(94)00013-1.
The Working Group (WG) dealt with the harmonization of routine methodologies of tests for unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS) both in vitro and in vivo. In contrast to the existing guidelines from OECD, EPA and EC on in vitro UDS tests (there is no Japanese UDS guideline), the Working Group recommends that in general in vitro UDS tests should be performed with primary hepatocytes. For routine applications any other cell types would need special justification. Hepatocytes from male rats are preferable, unless there are contra-indications on the basis of e.g. toxicokinetic data. According to the OECD, EPA and EC guidelines, UDS may be analysed by means of autoradiography (AR) or liquid scintillation counting (LSC). The WG recommends use of AR. LSC is less suitable due to the problem of differentiation between UDS activity and replicative DNA synthesis, and the disadvantage that cells cannot be analysed individually. Since a specific cell type was recommended by the WG, methodological aspects could be described in more detail than in the present guidelines. For in vitro tests, it was agreed that the initial viability of freshly isolated hepatocytes should be at least 70%. With regard to the need for confirmatory experiments in the event of a clear-cut negative result, the majority view was that confirmation by a second (normally not identical) experiment is still needed; this is in line with the present OECD and EC guidelines. Evaluation of results from UDS tests should be based primarily on net nuclear grain (NNG) values, although it is recognised that nuclear and cytoplasmic grains result from different biological processes. Since grain counts are influenced by a number of methodological parameters, no global threshold NNG value can be recommended for discrimination of positive and negative UDS results. For in vitro assays, the criteria for positive findings go beyond those of the present guidelines and two alternative approaches are given which are based on (1) dose-dependent increases in NNG values and (2) reproducibility, dose-effect relationship and cytotoxicity. At present there is no official guideline on the performance of in vivo UDS tests. Some fundamental recommendations given for in vitro methodology also apply to the in vivo assay. For routine testing with the in vivo UDS test, again the general use of hepatocytes from male rats is recommended. However, concerning the requirement to use one or two sexes, consistency with other in vivo genotoxicity assays (e.g. the micronucleus assay) would be preferable. As for the in vitro methodology, AR is preferred rather than LSC.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
工作组(WG)致力于协调体外和体内非程序性DNA合成(UDS)测试常规方法。与经合组织(OECD)、美国环境保护局(EPA)和欧盟委员会(EC)关于体外UDS测试的现有指南(日本没有UDS指南)不同,工作组建议一般体外UDS测试应使用原代肝细胞进行。对于常规应用,任何其他细胞类型都需要特殊理由。雄性大鼠的肝细胞更可取,除非基于例如毒代动力学数据有禁忌证。根据经合组织、美国环境保护局和欧盟委员会的指南,UDS可通过放射自显影(AR)或液体闪烁计数(LSC)进行分析。工作组建议使用AR。由于UDS活性与复制性DNA合成之间的区分问题以及无法单独分析细胞的缺点,LSC不太合适。由于工作组推荐了特定的细胞类型,因此可以比现行指南更详细地描述方法学方面。对于体外测试,一致认为新鲜分离的肝细胞的初始活力应至少为70%。关于在明确阴性结果情况下进行确证实验的必要性,多数观点认为仍需要通过第二个(通常不相同)实验进行确认;这与现行的经合组织和欧盟委员会指南一致。UDS测试结果的评估应主要基于净核颗粒(NNG)值,尽管人们认识到核颗粒和胞质颗粒来自不同的生物学过程。由于颗粒计数受多种方法学参数影响,无法推荐用于区分UDS阳性和阴性结果的全球阈值NNG值。对于体外测定,阳性结果的标准超出了现行指南的标准,并给出了两种替代方法,它们基于(1)NNG值的剂量依赖性增加和(2)可重复性、剂量效应关系和细胞毒性。目前尚无关于体内UDS测试实施的官方指南。一些针对体外方法学给出的基本建议也适用于体内测定。对于体内UDS测试的常规检测,同样建议一般使用雄性大鼠的肝细胞。然而,关于使用一种或两种性别的要求,与其他体内遗传毒性试验(如微核试验)保持一致会更好。至于体外方法学,首选AR而非LSC。(摘要截取自400字)