A case for a new paradigm in genetic toxicology testing.

The field of genetic toxicology is in need of a transformational change in experimental approaches and data interpretation so that genotoxicity data can better inform risk assessment. The historical approach of the one-hit theory for DNA-reactive chemicals and the view of genotoxicity as an inherent property of a chemical are being challenged, based on a better understanding of the complexity of molecular mechanisms of mutation. A seemingly simple, but hitherto rarely practiced, approach that could help catapult the field forward is the application of the fundamental tenet of toxicology, a better understanding of the dose-response. There is a growing body of evidence to support the existence of thresholds/NOAELs for genotoxic effects, even from DNA-reactive chemicals. It is also suggested that a better understanding of the internal and/or effective dose to the critical target, for both in vitro and in vivo experiments, can significantly help to improve characterization of the shape of the dose-response curve and serve to support cross-species extrapolation. These experimental design and data interpretation approaches will render genetic toxicology data more useful to inform the mode-of-action-based risk assessment process, and provide the paradigm shift necessary to help bring the field into the 21st century.

[1]  D. Chakravarty,et al.  Hyperosmolality in the form of elevated NaCl but not urea causes DNA damage in murine kidney cells. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  M. Moore,et al.  High concentrations of sodium chloride induce a "positive" response at the TK locus of L5178Y/TK+/- mouse lymphoma cells. , 1988, Environmental and molecular mutagenesis.

[3]  S. Seidel,et al.  Profiles of gene expression changes in L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells treated with methyl methanesulfonate and sodium chloride. , 2004, Mutagenesis.

[4]  Vernon E Walker,et al.  Biomarkers in toxicology and risk assessment: informing critical dose-response relationships. , 2008, Chemical research in toxicology.

[5]  岩崎 民子.  SOURCES AND EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION : United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes , 2002 .

[6]  G. Jenkins,et al.  Mechanistic influences for mutation induction curves after exposure to DNA-reactive carcinogens. , 2007, Cancer research.

[7]  J. Barrett,et al.  Identification and chromosomal assignment of two heterozygous mutations in the Trp53 gene in L5178Y/Tk(+/-)-3.7.2C mouse lymphoma cells. , 1998, Mutagenesis.

[8]  Miller Ja,et al.  Chemical carcinogenesis: mechanisms and approaches to its control. , 1971, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[9]  L. Marnett,et al.  Endogenous DNA adducts: potential and paradox. , 1993, Chemical research in toxicology.

[10]  Micheline Kirsch-Volders,et al.  Indirect mechanisms of genotoxicity. , 2003, Toxicology letters.

[11]  Fagen Zhang,et al.  Dose-response and operational thresholds/NOAELs for in vitro mutagenic effects from DNA-reactive mutagens, MMS and MNU. , 2009, Mutation research.

[12]  P. Mosesso,et al.  High-dose-level effects in mutagenicity assays utilizing mammalian cells in culture. , 1988, Mutagenesis.

[13]  M. Armstrong,et al.  Effects of high osmotic strength on chromosome aberrations, sister-chromatid exchanges and DNA strand breaks, and the relation to toxicity. , 1987, Mutation research.

[14]  J. Kleinjans,et al.  Application of toxicogenomics to study mechanisms of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity. , 2009, Toxicology letters.

[15]  R. Storer,et al.  The mouse lymphoma L5178Y Tk+/- cell line is heterozygous for a codon 170 mutation in the p53 tumor suppressor gene. , 1997, Mutation research.

[16]  Lutz Müller,et al.  In vivo studies in the mouse to define a threshold for the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. , 2009, Mutation research.

[17]  An in vitro screening paradigm for extracts of whole foods for detection of potential toxicants. , 2002, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[18]  Lynn H Pottenger,et al.  Genetic toxicity assessment: employing the best science for human safety evaluation part VI: when salt and sugar and vegetables are positive, how can genotoxicity data serve to inform risk assessment? , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[19]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  Dose-dependent transitions in mechanisms of toxicity. , 2004, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[20]  Raymond R Tice,et al.  Comparison of flow cytometry- and microscopy-based methods for measuring micronucleated reticulocyte frequencies in rodents treated with nongenotoxic and genotoxic chemicals. , 2008, Mutation research.

[21]  T. Ushijima,et al.  No-observed effect levels for carcinogenicity and for in vivo mutagenicity of a genotoxic carcinogen. , 2004, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[22]  J. Bemis,et al.  In vivo mutation assay based on the endogenous Pig‐a locus , 2008, Environmental and molecular mutagenesis.

[23]  M Younes,et al.  IPCS conceptual framework for evaluating a mode of action for chemical carcinogenesis. , 2001, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[24]  J. Bemis,et al.  Erythrocyte-based Pig-a gene mutation assay: demonstration of cross-species potential. , 2008, Mutation research.

[25]  P. Kasper,et al.  Human biological relevance and the use of threshold-arguments in regulatory genotoxicity assessment: experience with pharmaceuticals. , 2000, Mutation research.

[26]  Alexei Vazquez,et al.  The genetics of the p53 pathway, apoptosis and cancer therapy , 2008, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[27]  Raffaella Corvi,et al.  How to reduce false positive results when undertaking in vitro genotoxicity testing and thus avoid unnecessary follow-up animal tests: Report of an ECVAM Workshop. , 2007, Mutation research.

[28]  M. Aardema,et al.  Characterization of p53 in Chinese hamster cell lines CHO-K1, CHO-WBL, and CHL: implications for genotoxicity testing. , 1999, Mutation research.

[29]  Jiri Aubrecht,et al.  Toxicogenomics: overview and potential applications for the study of non-covalent DNA interacting chemicals. , 2007, Mutation research.

[30]  K. R. Smith,et al.  Paracelsus and Goethe: founding fathers of environmental health. , 2000, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[31]  U. Vogel,et al.  A sucrose-rich diet induces mutations in the rat colon. , 2002, Cancer research.

[32]  J. Swenberg,et al.  Endogenous apurinic/apyrimidinic sites in genomic DNA of mammalian tissues. , 1999, Cancer research.

[33]  D. Eastmond,et al.  Detection of micronuclei, cell proliferation and hyperdiploidy in bladder epithelial cells of rats treated with o-phenylphenol. , 2002, Mutagenesis.

[34]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  Dose-dependent transitions in mechanisms of toxicity: case studies. , 2004, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[35]  Alan R. Boobis,et al.  IPCS Framework for Analyzing the Relevance of a Cancer Mode of Action for Humans , 2006 .