Genotoxicity assessment of eight nitrosamines using 2D and 3D HepaRG cell models.

N-nitrosamine impurities have been increasingly detected in human drugs. This is a safety concern as many nitrosamines are mutagenic in bacteria and carcinogenic in rodent models. Typically, the mutagenic and carcinogenic activity of nitrosamines requires metabolic activation by cytochromes P450 enzymes (CYPs), which in many in vitro models are supplied exogenously using rodent liver homogenates. There are only limited data on the genotoxicity of nitrosamines in human cell systems. In this study, we used metabolically competent human HepaRG cells, whose metabolic capability is comparable to that of primary human hepatocytes, to evaluate the genotoxicity of eight nitrosamines [N-cyclopentyl-4-nitrosopiperazine (CPNP), N-nitrosodibutylamine (NDBA), N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), N-nitrosodiisopropylamine (NDIPA), N-nitrosoethylisopropylamine (NEIPA), N-nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA), and N-nitrosomethylphenylamine (NMPA)]. Under the conditions we used to culture HepaRG cells, three-dimensional (3D) spheroids possessed higher levels of CYP activity compared to 2D monolayer cells; thus the genotoxicity of the eight nitrosamines was investigated using 3D HepaRG spheroids in addition to more conventional 2D cultures. Genotoxicity was assessed as DNA damage using the high-throughput CometChip assay and as aneugenicity/clastogenicity in the flow-cytometry-based micronucleus (MN) assay. Following a 24-h treatment, all the nitrosamines induced DNA damage in 3D spheroids, while only three nitrosamines, NDBA, NDEA, and NDMA, produced positive responses in 2D HepaRG cells. In addition, these three nitrosamines also caused significant increases in MN frequency in both 2D and 3D HepaRG models, while NMBA and NMPA were positive only in the 3D HepaRG MN assay. Overall, our results indicate that HepaRG spheroids may provide a sensitive, human-based cell system for evaluating the genotoxicity of nitrosamines.

Revisiting the mutagenicity and genotoxicity of N-nitroso propranolol in bacterial and human in vitro assays.

Propranolol is a widely used ß-blocker that can generate a nitrosated derivative, N-nitroso propranolol (NNP). NNP has been reported to be negative in the bacterial reverse mutation test (the Ames test) but genotoxic in other in vitro assays. In the current study, we systematically examined the in vitro mutagenicity and genotoxicity of NNP using several modifications of the Ames test known to affect the mutagenicity of nitrosamines, as well as a battery of genotoxicity tests using human cells. We found that NNP induced concentration-dependent mutations in the Ames test, both in two tester strains that detect base pair substitutions, TA1535 and TA100, as well as in the TA98 frameshift-detector strain. Although positive results were seen with rat liver S9, the hamster liver S9 fraction was more effective in bio-transforming NNP into a reactive mutagen. NNP also induced micronuclei and gene mutations in human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells in the presence of hamster liver S9. Using a panel of TK6 cell lines that each expresses a different human cytochrome P450 (CYP), CYP2C19 was identified as the most active enzyme in the bioactivation of NNP to a genotoxicant among those tested. NNP also induced concentration-dependent DNA strand breakage in metabolically competent 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D cultures of human HepaRG cells. This study indicates that NNP is genotoxic in a variety of bacterial and mammalian systems. Thus, NNP is a mutagenic and genotoxic nitrosamine and a potential human carcinogen.

Genotoxicity evaluation of nitrosamine impurities using human TK6 cells transduced with cytochrome P450s.

Many nitrosamines are recognized as mutagens and potent rodent carcinogens. Over the past few years, nitrosamine impurities have been detected in various drugs leading to drug recalls. Although nitrosamines are included in a 'cohort of concern' because of their potential human health risks, most of this concern is based on rodent cancer and bacterial mutagenicity data, and there are little data on their genotoxicity in human-based systems. In this study, we employed human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells transduced with human cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2A6 to evaluate the genotoxicity of six nitrosamines that have been identified as impurities in drug products: N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), N-nitrosoethylisopropylamine (NEIPA), N-nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutanoic acid (NMBA), N-nitrosomethylphenylamine (NMPA), N-nitrosodiisopropylamine (NDIPA), and N-nitrosodibutylamine (NDBA). Using flow cytometry-based assays, we found that 24-h treatment with NDEA, NEIPA, NMBA, and NMPA caused concentration-dependent increases in the phosphorylation of histone H2A.X (γH2A.X) in CYP2A6-expressing TK6 cells. Metabolism of these four nitrosamines by CYP2A6 also caused significant increases in micronucleus frequency as well as G2/M phase cell-cycle arrest. In addition, nuclear P53 activation was found in CYP2A6-expressing TK6 cells exposed to NDEA, NEIPA, and NMPA. Overall, the genotoxic potency of the six nitrosamine impurities in our test system was NMPA > NDEA ≈ NEIPA > NMBA > NDBA ≈ NDIPA. This study provides new information on the genotoxic potential of nitrosamines in human cells, complementing test results generated from traditional assays and partially addressing the issue of the relevance of nitrosamine genotoxicity for humans. The metabolically competent human cell system reported here may be a useful model for risk assessment of nitrosamine impurities found in drugs.

Interpretation and considerations on the safety evaluation of human drug metabolites.

The final Food and Drug Administration guidance on the safety testing of drug metabolites was published in February 2008. Discussions of the role and applications of this guidance were addressed at several public scientific meetings over the past year. One of the main differences between the draft and the finalized guidance is that in the latter, the human metabolite level was correlated to the parent drug level in plasma, whereas this parameter was considered in relationship to administered dose or total exposure in the draft guidance. The parent drug concentration in plasma has traditionally been the parameter commonly measured in animals during drug development and the one used to estimate drug clinical levels and to assess human risk. Moreover, circulating parent drug in general is the molecule with the intended therapeutic and pharmacologic effect. Therefore, it is appropriate to compare metabolite concentration to that of the parent drug. This report elaborates on this issue and supports other alternative rational and scientific approaches on the design of nonclinical studies that may be needed to test a human drug metabolite.

Current and future application of genetic toxicity assays: the role and value of in vitro mammalian assays.

With the advent of new technologies (e.g., genomics, automated analyses, and in vivo monitoring), new regulations (e.g., the reduction of animal tests by the European REACH), and new approaches to toxicology (e.g., Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century, National Research Council), the field of regulatory genetic toxicology is undergoing a serious re-examination. Within this context, Toxicological Sciences has published a series of articles in its Forum Section on the theme, "Genetic Toxicity Assessment: Employing the Best Science for Human Safety Evaluation" (beginning with Goodman et al.). As a contribution to the Forum discussions, we present current methods for evaluating mutagenic/genotoxic risk using standard genotoxicity test batteries, and suggest ways to address and incorporate new technologies. We recognize that the occurrence of positive results in relation to cancer prediction has led to criticism of in vitro mammalian cell genetic toxicity assays. We address criticism of test results related to weak positives, associated only with considerable toxicity, only seen at high concentrations, not accompanied by positive results in the other tests of standard test batteries, and/or not correlating well with rodent carcinogenicity tests. We suggest that the problems pointed out by others with these assays already have been resolved, to a large extent, by international groups working to update assay protocols, and by changes in data interpretation at regulatory agencies. New guidances at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration improve data evaluation and help refocus risk assessment. We discuss the results of international groups working together to integrate new technologies and evaluate new tests, including human monitoring. We suggest that strategies for identifying human health risks should naturally change to integrate new technologies; however, changes should be made only when justified by strong scientific evidence of improvement in the risk assessment paradigm.