Aneuploidy: a report of an ECETOC task force.

Aneuploidy plays a significant role in adverse human health conditions including birth defects, pregnancy wastage and cancer. Although there is clear evidence of chemically induced aneuploidy in experimental systems, to date there are insufficient data to determine with certainty if chemically induced aneuploidy contributes to human disease. However, since there is no reason to assume that chemically induced aneuploidy will not occur in human beings, it is prudent to address the aneugenic potential of chemicals in the safety assessment process. A wide range of methods has been described for the detection of chemically induced aneuploidy including subcellular systems, tests with fungi, plants and Drosophila as well as in vitro mammalian systems and in vivo mammalian somatic and germ cell assays. However, none of these methods is sufficiently validated or widely used in routine screening. Underlying the efforts to develop aneuploidy-specific assays is the presumption that current genetic toxicology tests do not detected chemicals that have aneuploidy-inducing potential. To address this, we have critically evaluated data from standard genetic toxicology assays for 16 known or suspected aneugens. The conclusions from the review are listed below. 1. At present there are only nine chemicals that can be classified as definitive aneugens, as determined by positive results in in vivo rodent assays. 2. As expected, the majority of definitive and suspected aneugens are negative in the bacterial mutation assay. 3. The majority of definitive aneugens evaluated induce polyploidy in vitro. With few exception, they also induced structural chromosome aberrations in vitro. 4. All of the definitive aneugens that have been sufficiently tested induce micronuclei in rodent bone marrow cells in vivo. A number of these chemicals also induced structural chromosome aberrations in vivo. 5. There is no evidence for a unique germ cell aneugen, that is a chemical that induces aneuploidy in germ cells and not in somatic cells. Furthermore, an analysis of several databases indicates the proportion of chemicals which induce polyploidy and not chromosome aberrations in vitro is low. Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made: for screening purposes, a standard genotoxicity test battery (including an in vitro cytogenetic assay with an assessment of polyploidy and clastogenicity at the same harvest time) should be performed; in the absence of polyploidy induction in vitro no further evaluation of aneuploidy-inducing potential is needed; if polyploidy is observed, in vitro follow-up testing to investigate further the aneuploidy-inducing potential should be conducted; such follow-up testing will generally start with the conduct of a standard in vivo somatic cell micronucleus assay; if the in vivo somatic cell micronucleus assay is negative, with adequate evidence of exposure of the bone marrow to the test compound, no further testing of aneuploidy-inducing potential is needed; if the in vivo somatic cell micronucleus assay is positive, further information on mechanisms of micronucleus induction can be obtained by using kinetochore/centromeric staining in vitro and/or in vivo; an assessment of potential germ cell aneuploidy activity may then be considered; aneuploidy induction which does not involve the direct interaction of a chemical or its metabolite(s) with DNA is expected to have a threshold. This must be considered in the risk assessment of such chemicals; this is not addressed by current risk assessment guidelines.

Chromosomal aberrations in vitro induced by aneugens.

Various aneugens were reported to induce structural chromosomal aberrations beside their influence on cell division and their aneugenic potential To asses, whether a relationship between disturbance of cell division and clastogenic potential exists, CHO cells were treated with the well-known aneugens colcemid, colchicine and vincristine and investigated for the induction of structural chromosomal aberrations, polyploid cells and alterations in mitotic index. At low and intermediate concentration, all compounds induced polyploidy and an increase in mitotic index, but no structural aberrations at all. However, at high concentrations, colcemid and colchicine both induced numerous structural chromosomal aberrations in diploid cells. Colchicine was also clastogenic in tetraploid cells. Vincristine did not induce structural chromosomal aberrations in diploid cells, but in tetraploid cells. The clastogenic effects showed a clear-cut threshold with all three compounds. Furthermore, it was found that the tetraploid condition in CHO cells is generally accompanied by an increase in structural chromosomal aberrations, in vehicle controls as well as in cultures treated with the aneugens. Nevertheless, this study demonstrates that for the three aneugenic compounds tested, no direct relationship between compound induced disturbance of cell cycle and compound induced structural chromosomal aberration incidence exists.

Criteria for the standardization of Salmonella mutagenicity tests: results of a collaborative study. II. Studies to investigate the effect of bacterial liquid culture preparation conditions on Salmonella mutagenicity test results.

The influence of various parameters and growth conditions in the "overnight culture" of Salmonella typhimurium strains on mutagenicity test results was investigated. A number of factors were first suspected to be of some importance for the quantitative outcome of the mutagenicity test. None of them, however, was found to influence the results to such a marked extent as to be a major source of variability. Only the brand of nutrient broth used for the propagation of the bacteria proved finally to have a certain effect on the number of (spontaneous and induced) revertant colonies, although no precise and quantitative statements can be made with regard to a possible standardization of this experimental segment in the Salmonella mutagenicity test. The occurrence of such unpredictable but noticeable influences is, however, evidence for the importance of an intralaboratory optimization and standardization of all parts of the test procedure.