Fetterman B A, Kim B S, Margolin B H, Schildcrout J S, Smith M G, Wagner S M, Zeiger E
Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Environ Mol Mutagen. 1997;29(3):312-22. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2280(1997)29:3<312::aid-em12>3.0.co;2-h.
Many in vitro tests have been developed to identify chemicals that can damage cellular DNA or cause mutations, and secondarily to identify potential carcinogens. The test receiving by far the most use and attention has been the Salmonella (SAL) mutagenesis test developed by Ames and colleagues [(1973): Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:2281-2285; (1975): Mutat Res 31:347-364], because of its initial promise of high qualitative (YES/NO) predictivity for cancer in rodents and, by extension, in humans. In addition to the initial reports of high qualitative predictivity, there was also an early report by Meselson and Russell [in Hiatt HH et al (1977): "Origins of Human Cancer, Book C: Human Risk Assessment," pp 1473-1481] of a quantitative relationship between mutagenic potency measured in SAL and carcinogenic potency measured in rodents, for a small number of chemicals. However, other reports using larger numbers of chemicals have found only very weak correlations. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether mutagenic potency, as measured in a number of different ways, could be used to improve predictivity of carcinogenicity, either qualitatively or quantitatively. To this end, eight measures of SAL mutagenic potency were used. This study firmly establishes that the predictive relationship between mutagenic potency in SAL and rodent carcinogenicity is, at best, weak. When predicting qualitative carcinogenicity, only qualitative mutagenicity is useful; none of the quantitative measures of potency considered improves the carcinogenicity prediction. In fact, when qualitative mutagenicity is forced out of the model, the quantitative measures are still not predictive of carcinogenicity. When predicting quantitative carcinogenicity, several possible methods were considered for summarizing potency over all experiments; however, in all cases, the relationship between mutagenic potency predictors and quantitative carcinogenicity is very weak.
已经开发了许多体外试验来识别能够损伤细胞DNA或引起突变的化学物质,其次是识别潜在的致癌物。到目前为止使用最为广泛且备受关注的试验是由艾姆斯及其同事开发的沙门氏菌(SAL)诱变试验[(1973年):《美国国家科学院院刊》70:2281 - 2285;(1975年):《突变研究》31:347 - 364],因为其最初有望对啮齿动物乃至人类的癌症具有高定性(是/否)预测性。除了关于高定性预测性的最初报告外,梅塞尔森和拉塞尔也有一份早期报告[载于希亚特大卫等人(1977年):《人类癌症的起源,C卷:人类风险评估》,第1473 - 1481页],指出对于少数化学物质,在SAL中测得的诱变效力与在啮齿动物中测得的致癌效力之间存在定量关系。然而,其他使用大量化学物质的报告仅发现了非常微弱的相关性。本研究的主要目的是确定以多种不同方式测量的诱变效力是否可用于在定性或定量方面提高致癌性的预测性。为此,使用了SAL诱变效力的八项指标。本研究明确证实,SAL中的诱变效力与啮齿动物致癌性之间的预测关系充其量很弱。在预测定性致癌性时,只有定性诱变性是有用的;所考虑的效力的定量指标均未改善致癌性预测。实际上,当将定性诱变性从模型中排除时,定量指标仍然无法预测致癌性。在预测定量致癌性时,考虑了几种可能的方法来汇总所有实验中的效力;然而,在所有情况下,诱变效力预测指标与定量致癌性之间的关系都非常弱。