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.

Controlling persistent organic pollutants-what next?

Within the context of current international initiatives on the control of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), an overview is given of the scientific knowledge relating to POP sources, emissions, transport, fate and effects. At the regional scale, improvements in mass balance models for well-characterised POPs are resulting in an ability to estimate their environmental concentrations with sufficient accuracy to be of help for some regulatory purposes. The relevance of the parameters used to define POPs within these international initiatives is considered with an emphasis on mechanisms for adding new substances to the initial lists. A tiered approach is proposed for screening the large number of untested chemical substances according to their long-range transport potential, persistence and bioaccumulative potential prior to more detailed risk assessments. The importance of testing candidate POPs for chronic toxicity (i.e. for immunotoxicity, endocrine disruption and carcinogenicity) is emphasised as is a need for the further development of relevant SAR (structure activity relationship) models and in vitro and in vivo tests for these effects. Where there is a high level of uncertainty at the risk assessment stage, decision-makers may have to rely on expert judgement and weight-of-evidence, taking into account the precautionary principle and the views of relevant stake-holders. Close co-operation between the various international initiatives on POPs will be required to ensure that assessment criteria and procedures are as compatible as possible.

Isoprene: background and issues.

Isoprene monomer is derived from petroleum cracking and is used in the manufacturing of polyisoprene, butyl rubber and a variety of copolymers. It is also the monomeric unit of naturally occurring terpenes (e.g. lycopenes, the pigmentation in tomatoes). Isoprene occurs in tobacco smoke and it is released by a wide range of plants and mammals (including man). Portion of the isoprene present in the atmosphere is therefore from natural origin. Isoprene is chemically closely related to butadiene. Both substances are being used in similar industrial processes and because of the structural analogy, it is often speculated that the toxicological properties of isoprene must resemble those of butadiene. In fact, the acute toxicity of isoprene is very similar and also the biotransformation to mono- and diepoxides is qualitatively alike. There is however a difference; isoprene is asymmetric and therefore more metabolic enantiomers are possible. Pharmacokinetic studies have demonstrated species differences (as with butadiene) in the maximum metabolic elimination rate: in mice this was determined to be at least three times higher than in rats which implies a species sensitivity in isoprene metabolism in the mouse. Both isoprene and its major metabolites were tested for mutagenic activity in Salmonella strains. Only the diepoxide was found to be positive in TA100. In in vivo cytogenetic tests in mice, no chromosomal aberrations were observed but an increase in SCEs and micronuclei was evident. As is the case with butadiene there are clear indications from long-term rat/mice inhalational studies with isoprene of a species difference in tumour response. Based on cytogenetic findings and tumorigenicity data it is clear that isoprene is less potent than butadiene. Such observations are important and useful to reduce uncertainties in risk-characterisation procedures (e.g. occupational exposure standard setting; EU existing chemicals regulations).

Role of genotoxicity assays in the regulation of chemicals in The Netherlands: considerations and experiences.

This paper discusses genotoxicity testing and data interpretation as applied in The Netherlands in the context of the regulation of chemicals. Guidelines were first formulated in 1981 and their use evolved in practice, on the basis of increasing experience at the national and international levels. The distinction between in vitro assays to detect intrinsic genotoxic properties and in vivo assays as a subsequent phase to show the realization of this potential in an intact organism has always been a cornerstone of the Dutch approach. Several critical aspects of the use of short-term genotoxicity tests in sequential schemes are discussed, such as their predictivity for carcinogenicity, the limited database concerning the performance of short-term in vivo assays, the relevance of devising separate strategies to test for possible carcinogenicity and germ cell mutagenicity, and the use of short-term tests to discriminate between genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. Examples are given of how short-term tests contributed to the toxicological evaluation of chemicals in The Netherlands.

Hypersensitivity to ionizing radiation, in vitro, in a new chromosomal breakage disorder, the Nijmegen Breakage Syndrome.

The Nijmegen Breakage Syndrome (NBS) is a new chromosomal instability disorder different from ataxia telangiectasia (AT) and other chromosome-breakage syndromes. Cells from an NBS patient appeared hypersensitive to X-irradiation. X-rays induced significantly more chromosomal damage in NBS lymphocytes and fibroblasts than in normal cells. The difference was most pronounced after irradiation in G2. Further, NBS fibroblasts were more readily killed by X-rays than normal fibroblasts. In addition, the DNA synthesis in NBS cells was more resistant to X-rays and bleomycin than that in normal cells. The reaction of NBS cells to X-rays and bleomycin was similar to that of cells from patients with ataxia telangiectasia. Our results indicate that NBS and AT, which also have similar chromosomal characteristics, must be closely related.