A critical appraisal of the sensitivity of in vivo genotoxicity assays in detecting human carcinogens.

Genotoxicity testing is an important part of standard safety testing strategies. Animal studies have always been a key component, either as a mandatory part of the regulatory test battery, or to follow-up questionable in vitro findings. The strengths and weaknesses of in vivo assays is a continuous matter of debate, including their capacity to predict (human) carcinogenicity. We have therefore analysed the sensitivity of five routinely used in vivo tests to determine, in addition to other aspects, which tests or combination of tests best identify 73 chemicals classified as IARC Group 1 and 2A carcinogens. The in vivo tests included the micronucleus (MN), unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS), comet, Pig-a and transgenic rodent assays (TGR). The individual assays detect 74.2% (49/66, MN), 64.3% (9/14, UDS), 92.1% (35/38, comet), 82.4% (14/17, Pig-a) and 90.3% (28/31, TGR) of the probable and confirmed human carcinogens that were tested in these assays. Combining assays that cover different genotoxicity endpoints and multiple tissues, e.g. the bone marrow MN and the liver comet assays, increases the sensitivity further (to 94%). Correlations in terms of organ-specificity for these assays with human cancer target organs revealed only a limited correlation for the hematopoietic system but not for other organs. The data supports the use of the comet and TGR assays for detection of 'site-of-first-contact' genotoxicants, but these chemicals were generally also detected in assays that measure genotoxicity in tissues not directly exposed, e.g. liver and the hematopoietic system. In conclusion, our evaluation confirmed a high sensitivity of the five in vivo genotoxicity assays for prediction of human carcinogens, which can be further increased by combining assays. Moreover, the addition of the comet to the in vivo MN test would identify all DNA reactive human carcinogens. Importantly, integration of some of the study readouts into one experiment is an animal-saving alternative to performing separate experiments.

Challenging a Myth and Misconception: Red-Light Vision in Rats.

Due to the lack of L-cones in the rodent retina, it is generally assumed that red light is invisible to rodents. Thus, red lights and red filter foils are widely used in rodent husbandry and experimentation allowing researchers to observe animals in an environment that is thought to appear dark to the animals. To better understand red-light vision in rodents, we assessed retinal sensitivity of pigmented and albino rats to far-red light by electroretinogram. We examined the sensitivity to red light not only on the light- but also dark-adapted retina, as red observation lights in husbandry are used during the dark phase of the light cycle. Intriguingly, both rods and cones of pigmented as well as albino rats show a retinal response to red light, with a high sensitivity of the dark-adapted retina and large electroretinogram responses in the mesopic range. Our results challenge the misconception of rodents being red-light blind. Researchers and housing facilities should rethink the use of red observation lights at night.

Evaluation of the GreenScreen GADD45alpha-GFP indicator assay with non-proprietary and proprietary compounds.

The GreenScreen GADD45alpha indicator assay has been assessed for its concordance with in vitro genotoxicity and rodent carcinogenicity bioassay data. To test robustness, sensitivity, and specificity of the assay, 91 compounds with known genotoxicity results were screened in a blinded manner. Fifty seven of the compounds were classified as in vitro genotoxic whereas 34 were non-genotoxic. Out of the 91 compounds, 50 had been tested in 2-year carcinogenicity assays, with 33 identified to be rodent carcinogens and 17 non-carcinogens. Gadd45alpha assay sensitivity and specificity for genotoxicity was 30% and 97%, respectively (17/57 and 33/34), whereas its sensitivity and specificity for rodent carcinogenicity was 30% and 88%, respectively (10/33 and 15/17). Gadd45alpha assay genotoxicity results from this validation study exhibited a high concordance with previously published results as well as for compound test results generated at two different sites (91%, 19/21), indicating that the assay is both robust and reproducible. In conclusion, results from this blinded and independent validation study indicate that the GreenScreen GADD45 indicator assay is reproducible and reliable with low sensitivity and high specificity for identifying genotoxic and carcinogenic compounds.

ECVAM retrospective validation of in vitro micronucleus test (MNT).

In the past decade several studies comparing the in vitro chromosome aberration test (CAT) and the in vitro micronucleus test (MNT) were performed. A high correlation was observed in each of the studies (>85%); however, no formal validation for the micronucleus in vitro assay had been carried out. Therefore, a working group was established by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) to perform a retrospective validation of the existing data, in order to evaluate the validity of the in vitro MNT on the basis of the modular validation approach. The primary focus of this retrospective validation was on the evaluation of the potential of the in vitro MNT as alternative to the standard in vitro CAT. The working group evaluated, in a first step, the available published data and came to the conclusion that two studies [German ring trial, von der Hude, W., Kalweit, S., Engelhardt, G. et al. (2000) In-vitro micronucleus assay with Chinese hamster V79 cells: results of a collaborative study with 26 chemicals. Mutat. Res., 468, 137-163, and SFTG International Collaborative Study, Lorge, E., Thybaud, V., Aardema, M., Oliver, J., Wataka, A., Lorenzon, G. and Marzin, D. (2006) SFTG International Collaborative Study on in-vitro micronucleus test I. General conditions and overall conclusions of the study. Mutat. Res., 607, 13-36] met the criteria for a retrospective validation according to the criteria previously defined by the working group. These two studies were evaluated in depth (including the reanalysis of raw data) and provided the information required for assessing the reliability (reproducibility) of the test. For the assessment of the concordance between the in vitro MNT and the in vitro CAT, additional published data were considered. Based on this retrospective validation, the ECVAM Validation Management Team concluded that the in vitro MNT is reliable and relevant and can therefore be used as an alternative method to the in vitro CAT. Following peer review, these conclusions were formally endorsed by the ECVAM Scientific Advisory Committee.

Genetic toxicity assessment: employing the best science for human safety evaluation part IV: Recommendation of a working group of the Gesellschaft fuer Umwelt-Mutationsforschung (GUM) for a simple and straightforward approach to genotoxicity testing.

Based on new scientific developments and experience of the regulation of chemical compounds, a working group of the Gesellschaft fuer Umweltmutationsforschung (GUM), a German-speaking section of the European Environmental Mutagen Society, proposes a simple and straightforward approach to genotoxicity testing. This strategy is divided into basic testing (stage I) and follow-up testing (stage II). Stage I consists of a bacterial gene mutation test plus an in vitro micronucleus test, therewith covering all mutagenicity endpoints. Stage II testing is in general required only if relevant positive results occur in stage I testing and will usually be in vivo. However, an isolated positive bacterial gene mutation test in stage I can be followed up with a gene mutation assay in mammalian cells. If this assay turns out negative and there are no compound-specific reasons for concern, in vivo follow-up testing may not be required. In those cases where in vivo testing is indicated, a single study combining the analysis of micronuclei in bone marrow with the comet assay in appropriately selected tissues is suggested. Negative results for both end points in relevant tissues will generally provide sufficient evidence to conclude that the test compound is nongenotoxic in vivo. Compounds which were recognized as in vivo somatic cell mutagens/genotoxicants in this hazard identification step will need further testing. In the absence of additional data, such compounds will have to be assumed to be potential genotoxic carcinogens and potential germ cell mutagens.

Meeting report: Validation of toxicogenomics-based test systems: ECVAM-ICCVAM/NICEATM considerations for regulatory use.

This is the report of the first workshop "Validation of Toxicogenomics-Based Test Systems" held 11-12 December 2003 in Ispra, Italy. The workshop was hosted by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and organized jointly by ECVAM, the U.S. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), and the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM). The primary aim of the workshop was for participants to discuss and define principles applicable to the validation of toxicogenomics platforms as well as validation of specific toxicologic test methods that incorporate toxicogenomics technologies. The workshop was viewed as an opportunity for initiating a dialogue between technologic experts, regulators, and the principal validation bodies and for identifying those factors to which the validation process would be applicable. It was felt that to do so now, as the technology is evolving and associated challenges are identified, would be a basis for the future validation of the technology when it reaches the appropriate stage. Because of the complexity of the issue, different aspects of the validation of toxicogenomics-based test methods were covered. The three focus areas include a) biologic validation of toxicogenomics-based test methods for regulatory decision making, b) technical and bioinformatics aspects related to validation, and c) validation issues as they relate to regulatory acceptance and use of toxicogenomics-based test methods. In this report we summarize the discussions and describe in detail the recommendations for future direction and priorities.

Assessment of hepatotoxic liabilities by transcript profiling.

Male Wistar rats were treated with various model compounds or the appropriate vehicle controls in order to create a reference database for toxicogenomics assessment of novel compounds. Hepatotoxic compounds in the database were either known hepatotoxicants or showed hepatotoxicity during preclinical testing. Histopathology and clinical chemistry data were used to anchor the transcript profiles to an established endpoint (steatosis, cholestasis, direct acting, peroxisomal proliferation or nontoxic/control). These reference data were analyzed using a supervised learning method (support vector machines, SVM) to generate classification rules. This predictive model was subsequently used to assess compounds with regard to a potential hepatotoxic liability. A steatotic and a non-hepatotoxic 5HT(6) receptor antagonist compound from the same series were successfully discriminated by this toxicogenomics model. Additionally, an example is shown where a hepatotoxic liability was correctly recognized in the absence of pathological findings. In vitro experiments and a dog study confirmed the correctness of the toxicogenomics alert. Another interesting observation was that transcript profiles indicate toxicologically relevant changes at an earlier timepoint than routinely used methods. Together, these results support the useful application of toxicogenomics in raising alerts for adverse effects and generating mechanistic hypotheses that can be followed up by confirmatory experiments.

Toxicogenomics in the pharmaceutical industry: hollow promises or real benefit?

Almost 10 years ago, microarray technology was established as a new powerful tool for large-scale analysis of gene expression. Soon thereafter the new technology was discovered by toxicologists for the purpose of deciphering the molecular events underlying toxicity, and the term "Toxicogenomics" appeared in scientific literature. Ever since, the toxicology community was fascinated by the multiplicity of sophisticated possibilities toxicogenomics seems to offer: genome-wide analysis of toxicant-induced expression profiles may provide a means for prediction of toxicity prior to classical toxicological endpoints such as histopathology or clinical chemistry. Some researchers even speculated of the classical methods being superfluous before long. It was assumed that by using toxicogenomics it would be possible to classify compounds early in drug development and consequently save animals, time, and money in pre-clinical toxicity studies. Moreover, it seemed within reach to unravel the molecular mechanisms underlying toxicity. The feasibility of bridging data derived from in vitro and in vivo systems, identifying new biomarkers, and comparing toxicological responses "across-species" was also excessively praised. After several years of intensive application of microarray technology in the field of toxicology, not only by the pharmaceutical industry, it is now time to survey its achievements and to question how many of these wishes and promises have really come true.

Discriminating different classes of toxicants by transcript profiling.

Male rats were treated with various model compounds or the appropriate vehicle controls. Most substances were either well-known hepatotoxicants or showed hepatotoxicity during preclinical testing. The aim of the present study was to determine if biological samples from rats treated with various compounds can be classified based on gene expression profiles. In addition to gene expression analysis using microarrays, a complete serum chemistry profile and liver and kidney histopathology were performed. We analyzed hepatic gene expression profiles using a supervised learning method (support vector machines; SVMs) to generate classification rules and combined this with recursive feature elimination to improve classification performance and to identify a compact subset of probe sets with potential use as biomarkers. Two different SVM algorithms were tested, and the models obtained were validated with a compound-based external cross-validation approach. Our predictive models were able to discriminate between hepatotoxic and nonhepatotoxic compounds. Furthermore, they predicted the correct class of hepatotoxicant in most cases. We provide an example showing that a predictive model built on transcript profiles from one rat strain can successfully classify profiles from another rat strain. In addition, we demonstrate that the predictive models identify nonresponders and are able to discriminate between gene changes related to pharmacology and toxicity. This work confirms the hypothesis that compound classification based on gene expression data is feasible.

Gene expression in two hepatic cell lines, cultured primary hepatocytes, and liver slices compared to the in vivo liver gene expression in rats: possible implications for toxicogenomics use of in vitro systems.

Microarray technology allows the simultaneous analysis of mRNA expression levels of thousands of genes. In the field of toxicogenomics, this technology could help to identify potentially unsafe compounds based on the changes in mRNA expression patterns they induce. Rodent in vivo and in vitro systems are currently the experimental models of choice for predictive toxicology, especially in early phases of development. This study characterizes several hepatic in vitro systems based on mRNA expression profiles, comparing them to gene expression in liver tissue. The in vitro systems investigated comprise two rat liver cell lines (BRL3A and NRL clone 9), primary hepatocytes in conventional monolayer or in sandwich culture, and liver slices. The results demonstrate that liver slices exhibit the strongest similarity to liver tissue regarding mRNA expression, whereas the two cell lines are quite different from the whole liver. We were able to identify genes with strong changes in expression levels in all or at least one of the in vitro systems relative to whole liver. In particular, for some cytochrome P450s the differences observed on the mRNA expression level were paralleled by protein expression and enzymatic activity. In addition, the effect of time in culture was assessed. We were able to show a profound effect of the duration of culture. Expression patterns change most rapidly soon after cell isolation and culture initiation and stabilize with time in culture. The findings are discussed with respect to the usefulness of the various hepatic in vitro systems for microarray-based toxicological testing of compounds.

Report from the in vitro micronucleus assay working group.

UNLABELLED: At the Washington "2nd International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing" (25-26 March 1999) current methodologies and data for the in vitro micronucleus test were reviewed. As a result, guidelines for the conduct of specific aspects of the protocol were developed. Agreement was achieved on the following topics: choice of cells, slide preparation, analysis of micronuclei, toxicity, use of cytochalasin-B, number of doses, and treatment/harvest times [Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 35 (2000) 167]. Because there were a number of important in vitro micronucleus validation studies in progress, it was not possible to design a definitive, internationally harmonized protocol at that time. These studies have now been completed and the data were reviewed at the Plymouth "3rd International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing" (28-29 June 2002). Data from studies coordinated by the French Society of Genetic Toxicology, Japanese collaborative studies, European pharmaceutical industry validation studies, along with data from Lilly Research Laboratories were used to prepare conclusions on the main aspects of the in vitro micronucleus protocol. In this paper, the consensus agreements on the protocol for performing the in vitro micronucleus assay are presented. The major recommendations concern: 1. Demonstration of cell proliferation: both cell lines and lymphocytes can be used, but demonstration of cell proliferation in both control and treated cells is compulsory for the acceptance of the test. 2. Assessment of toxicity and dose range finding: assessment of toxicity should be performed by determining cell proliferation, e.g. increased cell counts (CC) or population doubling (PD) without cytochalasin-B, or e.g. cytokinesis-block proliferation index with cytochalasin-B; and by determining other markers for cytotoxicity (confluency, apoptosis, necrosis) which can provide valuable additional information. 3. Treatment schedules for cell lines and lymphocytes. 4. Choice of positive controls: without S9-mix both a clastogen (e.g. mitomycin C or bleomycin) and an aneugen (e.g. colchicine) should be included as positive controls and a clastogen that requires S9 for activity when S9-mix is used (e.g. dimethylnitrosamine, or cyclophosphamide in those cell types that cannot activate this agent directly). 5. Duplicate cultures and number of cells to be scored. 6. Repeat experiments: in lymphocytes, for each experiment blood from 2 different healthy young and non-smoking donors should be compared. In cell lines, the experiments need only to be repeated if the first one is negative. 7. STATISTICS: statistical significance should not be the sole factor for determining positive results. Biological meaning should serve as a guideline. Examples of statistical analyses are given.

GADD45α induction in the GreenScreen HC indicator assay does not occur independently of cytotoxicity.

Mammalian chromosomal integrity assays are influenced by cytotoxicity, a phenomenon which impacts data interpretation, assay specificity, and regulatory testing guidelines. Concordance of the GADD45α GreenScreen HC indicator assay to established in vitro and in vivo genetic toxicological assays has previously been described, yet a detailed description in the manner by which cytotoxicity influences its performance has not. Here we present a post-hoc analysis of a previously tested set of 91 proprietary and nonproprietary compounds investigating the influence of cytotoxicity on GADD45α induction and how varying assay cutoff criteria impacts assay performance. Significant cytotoxicity was identified to accompany the majority (72%) of compounds classified as genotoxic by GADD45α induction. Decreasing the GADD45α genotoxic induction criteria (from a 50 to a 30% increase over solvent controls) resulted in an increased assay sensitivity (from 30 to 68%) and concordance (from 55 to 68%), though a concomitant decrease in specificity was also observed (from 97 to 68%). We conclude that GADD45α induction in the GreenScreen HC indicator assay is influenced by cytotoxicity and that assay performance can be improved if different cutoff criteria are implemented.

Structure-activity relationship of oxadiazoles and allylic structures in the Ames test: an industry screening approach.

In recent years genotoxicity testing has become more and more important in the process of early screening for potential development compounds. In the case that a pharmacologically interesting structure is found to be positive in an in vitro mutagenicity test a straightforward approach starts by sorting out what substructure is responsible for the activity observed in the test. The Ames test is a rapid, convenient test system which has been effectively used in structure-activity relationship studies for mutagenicity, since it can rapidly establish differences in the mutagenic action of isomers and chemical analogs. The lead compound with a benzodiazepine-like structure and close analogs exhibited weak, but unequivocal positive effects in the Ames test (strains TA1535 and TA 100) after metabolic activation by rat liver homogenate fraction (S9). To identify substances within this class of compounds devoid of mutagenic liability an extensive structure-activity investigation was undertaken. More than 50 compounds were tested in the two critical bacterial strains, using a standard plate incorporation and a preincubation modification. It quickly became evident that the benzodiazepine structure was not involved. First hints that the allyl side chain were responsible for the Ames activity had to be refined in a more complex, but clear-cut structure-activity relationship during the course of the experiments. It was shown that all compounds with an allyl side chain, independent of the heterocycle, but surprisingly also all compounds with a specific arrangement of the heteroatoms in the oxadiazole ring, showed positive effects in at least one strain. Based on these investigations it was possible to select pharmacologically active structures without mutagenic liability.

Modulation of gene and protein expression by carbon tetrachloride in the rat liver.

The gene and protein expression changes after exposure to a toxic compound might help elucidate its mechanism of action. In this paper we investigated the effect of carbon tetrachloride (CCl(4)) on the gene and protein expression in rat livers. Adult Wistar rats were administered CCl(4) and livers were harvested 6 or 24 h thereafter. The analysis of mitochondrial proteins on 2D gels showed the upregulation of two proteins involved in stress (catalase and uricase). Among the downregulated proteins, enzymes related to the metabolism of lipids and aminoacids were affected. Additionally, alpha-2-macroglobulin and senescence marker protein, two proteins whose decrease in expression has been connected to hepatocyte damage, were decreased. Several of the upregulated genes are involved in stress response, DNA and protein damage, and repair. Genes coding for several enzymes involved in different metabolic pathways, including some P450, were downregulated in the treated animals. In conclusion, a single dose of CCl(4) caused gene and protein expression changes that can be related to its mechanism of toxicity. Results from both technologies support previous publications and provide possible new toxicity markers. However, the correlation between gene and protein expression at a given time point is less apparent, partly as a result of different regulatory mechanisms between gene and protein expression.