Report from the In Vitro Micronucleus Assay Working Group

At the Washington International Workshop on Genotoxicity Test Procedures (March 25–26, 1999), the current methodologies and data for the in vitro micronucleus test were reviewed. From this, guidelines for the conduct of specific aspects of the protocol were developed. Because there are a number of important in vitro micronucleus validation studies in progress, it was not possible to design a definitive, internationally harmonized protocol at this time. Agreement was achieved on the following topics: Cells. The choice of cells is flexible, yet the choice of cell type should be justified and take into consideration doubling time, spontaneous frequency of micronuclei, and genetic background. Slide preparation. A fixation method that preserves the cytoplasm and cytoplasmic boundaries, and minimizes clumping should be used. Use of fluorescent DNA‐specific dyes is encouraged for better detection of small micronuclei. Analysis. Micronuclei should have a diameter less than one‐third of the main nucleus, and should be clearly distinguishable from the main nucleus. In the cytokinesis‐block method, binucleated cells selected for analysis should have two clearly distinguishable main nuclei. Cells where the main nucleus(ei) is undergoing apoptosis should not be scored for micronuclei because the assumed micronuclei may have been the result of nuclear fragmentation during the apoptotic process. Toxicity. Cytotoxicity can be measured by various methods including cell growth, cell counts, nucleation (i.e., percent binucleated), division/proliferation index, confluence. A majority of the group recommended that the highest concentration should induce at least 50% cytotoxicity (by whatever measure is selected). Cytochalasin B. There is much debate regarding the use of cytochalasin B. For human lymphocytes, the use of cytochalasin B (6 μg/ml [lymphocytes cultured from whole blood cells] and 3–6 μg/ml [isolated lymphocyte cultures]) is recommended. For cell lines, because there were no definitive data showing a clear advantage or disadvantage of the use of cytochalasin B for a variety of chemicals, the majority opinion of the group was that at this time, the use of cytochalasin B for cell lines is considered optional. Further studies (many chemicals of a variety of potencies, tested both with and without cytochalasin B) are clearly needed to resolve this issue. Number of doses. At least three concentrations should be scored for micronuclei. Treatment/harvest times. At this time, there are not enough data to define the most appropriate treatment/harvest times. Following the principles of the in vitro metaphase assay (with or without metabolic activation), it was agreed that there was a need for a short treatment followed by a recovery time in the absence of test chemical, there was a need for a long treatment (maybe with and without recovery time), and ideally, treatment should cover cells in different cell cycle stages. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 35:167–172, 2000 © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  L. Migliore,et al.  Cytogenetic damage induced in human lymphocytes by adriamycin and vincristine: A comparison between micronucleus and chromosomal aberration assays. , 1987, Toxicology in Vitro.

[2]  T. Sofuni,et al.  Evaluation of the micronucleus test using a Chinese hamster cell line as an alternative to the conventional in vitro chromosomal aberration test. , 1992, Mutation research.

[3]  Micronuclei induced by alachlor, mitomycin-C and vinblastine in human lymphocytes: presence of centromeres and kinetochores and influence of staining technique. , 1996, Mutagenesis.

[4]  M. Fenech.  The Cytokinesis-Block Micronucleus Technique , 1996 .

[5]  S. Albertini,et al.  Detailed data on in vitro MNT and in vitro CA: industrial experience. , 1997, Mutation research.

[6]  S Albertini,et al.  Comparative evaluation of the in vitro micronucleus test and the in vitro chromosome aberration test: industrial experience. , 1997, Mutation research.

[7]  Summary and conclusions on the MNT in vitro and implication on testing strategies , 1997 .

[8]  M. Fenech,et al.  The advantages and disadvantages of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus method. , 1997, Mutation research.

[9]  M. Kirsch‐Volders,et al.  The in vitro micronucleus test: a multi-endpoint assay to detect simultaneously mitotic delay, apoptosis, chromosome breakage, chromosome loss and non-disjunction. , 1997, Mutation research.

[10]  G. Wahl,et al.  Selective Entrapment of Extrachromosomally Amplified DNA by Nuclear Budding and Micronucleation during S Phase , 1998, The Journal of cell biology.

[11]  H. Stopper,et al.  Evaluation of the in vitro micronucleus test as an alternative to the in vitro chromosomal aberration assay: position of the GUM Working Group on the in vitro micronucleus test. Gesellschaft für Umwelt-Mutations-forschung. , 1998, Mutation research.

[12]  M Fenech,et al.  Necrosis, apoptosis, cytostasis and DNA damage in human lymphocytes measured simultaneously within the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay: description of the method and results for hydrogen peroxide. , 1999, Mutagenesis.

[13]  C. Tanzarella,et al.  Effect of cytochalasin B on the induction of chromosome missegregation by colchicine at low concentrations in human lymphocytes. , 1999, Mutagenesis.

[14]  W. von der Hude,et al.  Chemically induced micronucleus formation in V79 cells--comparison of three different test approaches. , 1999, Mutation research.

[15]  M. Fenech,et al.  Effect of vitamin C supplementation on chromosome damage, apoptosis and necrosis ex vivo. , 1999, Carcinogenesis.

[16]  S. McKiernan,et al.  In vitro micronucleus assay with Chinese hamster V79 cells - results of a collaborative study with in situ exposure to 26 chemical substances. , 2000, Mutation research.