Use of Transgenic Mice in Carcinogenicity Hazard Assessment

Determining the carcinogenic potential of materials to which humans have significant exposure is an important, complex and imperfect exercise. Not only are the methods for such determinations protracted, expensive and utilize large numbers of animals, extrapolation of data from such studies to human risk is imprecise. Toxicologists have long recognized these shortcomings but the 2-year chronic rodent study has remained the gold standard. Recent developments in the field of molecular oncology and development of methods to insert or inactivate specific genes in animals have provided the tools with which to develop the next generation of carcinogenicity assays. With improved understanding of oncogene activation and tumor suppressor gene inactivation a number of animal models have been developed to dramatically reduce latency for chemically induced cancers. This has led to the development of shorter carcinogenicity assays. Also, because the spontaneous tumor frequencies in these animals are low during the in-life portion of the study, and studies are terminated well before the health complications of advanced aging are observed, it has been possible to reduce the group sizes and reduce animal usage. FDA's adoption of ICH S1B in 1997, (ICH, 1997) “Testing for the Carcinogenicity of Pharmaceuticals,” opened the door for the use of such transgenic models in regulatory toxicology. This presentation reviews the current state of the science and its application to regulatory issues.

[1]  L. Donehower,et al.  Loss of p53 in benzene-induced thymic lymphomas in p53+/- mice: evidence of chromosomal recombination. , 2000, Cancer research.

[2]  J. Haseman,et al.  The role of transgenic mouse models in carcinogen identification. , 2002, Environmental health perspectives.

[3]  R. Cardiff,et al.  v-Ha-ras transgene abrogates the initiation step in mouse skin tumorigenesis: effects of phorbol esters and retinoic acid. , 1990, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  L. Donehower,et al.  Is p53 Haploinsufficient for Tumor Suppression? Implications for the p53+/- Mouse Model in Carcinogenicity Testing , 2001, Toxicologic pathology.

[5]  M. Katsuki,et al.  Most tumors in transgenic mice with human c-Ha-ras gene contained somatically activated transgenes. , 1990, Oncogene.

[6]  Paul A Schulte,et al.  Priorities for development of research methods in occupational cancer. , 2002, Environmental health perspectives.

[7]  H. van Steeg,et al.  DNA Repair—Deficient Xpa and Xpa/p53+/- Knock-Out Mice: Nature of the Models , 2001, Toxicologic pathology.

[8]  R. Tennant,et al.  Follicular origin of epidermal papillomas in v-Ha-ras transgenic TG.AC mouse skin. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Rudolf B. Beems,et al.  Xpa and Xpa/p53+/- Knockout Mice: Overview of Available Data , 2001, Toxicologic pathology.

[10]  F. Sistare,et al.  Use of Transgenic Animals in Regulatory Carcinogenicity Evaluations , 2003 .

[11]  F. Borellini,et al.  Analysis for loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of p53 allele in tumors derived from p53+/− and CD‐1 mice following repeated subcutaneous injections of solutions containing antioxidants , 2001, Environmental and molecular mutagenesis.

[12]  R. T. Miller,et al.  "Toxicologic pathology of the reproductive and endocrine systems". , 2001, Toxicologic pathology.

[13]  K A McAllister,et al.  Mammary Tumor Induction and Premature Ovarian Failure in ApcMin Mice Are Not Enhanced by Brca2 Defi ciency , 2001, Toxicologic pathology.

[14]  L. Donehower,et al.  Mice deficient for p53 are developmentally normal but susceptible to spontaneous tumours , 1992, Nature.