Evaluation of the Litron In Vitro MicroFlow Kit for the flow cytometric enumeration of micronuclei (MN) in mammalian cells.

We have evaluated the performance of the prototype In Vitro MicroFlow Kit (Litron Laboratories), which offers a flow cytometric method for scoring micronuclei (MN). This method uses sequential staining to differentiate MN from chromatin fragments derived from apoptotic or necrotic cells. Data were generated using the genotoxins methylmethane sulphonate (MMS), dimethylbenzanthracene (DMBA) and vinblastine, and the non-genotoxins dexamethasone and staurosporine, which are known to induce apoptosis in vitro. The results obtained with these agents were compared with conventional microscopy. For short-duration exposures (3-4h) both manual and flow methodologies demonstrated good concordance, with concentration-related increases in the percentage of MN for MMS, DMBA and vinblastine. Statistically significant increases were observed at > or = 20 and 40 microg/mL, for manual and flow analysis, respectively, for MMS; at 0.5 and 0.75 microg/mL for DMBA; and at 0.035 and 0.04 microg/mL, respectively, for vinblastine. Dexamethasone showed clear negative responses by manual and flow cytometric analysis, with comparable results for both methodologies (all <1.7-fold compared with concurrent vehicle controls). Data for staurosporine, however, were less consistent showing significantly higher flow cytometric MN frequencies compared with those seen after manual analysis. Continuous (24 h) treatments were also conducted with MMS, vinblastine, dexamethasone and staurosporine. There was good concordance between the methodologies for MMS, staurosporine and vinblastine. However, dexamethasone generated discordant results, i.e. microscopic analysis was clearly negative at all doses tested, whereas flow cytometry produced significant increases in MN frequency (up to 8.1-fold at 100 microg/mL compared with the concurrent vehicle control). The inconsistencies observed between flow cytometry and standard microscopy, and the differences in assay sensitivity, particularly for apoptosis-inducing compounds, suggest that the prototype In Vitro MicroFlow Kit requires further refinement. Studies to investigate new parameters to address these issues are now under way and will be reported separately.

Interlaboratory evaluation of a flow cytometric, high content in vitro micronucleus assay.

An international, multi-lab trial was conducted to evaluate a flow cytometry-based method for scoring micronuclei in mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells [S.L. Avlasevich, S.M. Bryce, S.E. Cairns, S.D. Dertinger, In vitro micronucleus scoring by flow cytometry: differential staining of micronuclei versus apoptotic and necrotic chromatin enhances assay reliability, Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 47 (2006) 56-66]. A reference laboratory investigated the potential of six chemicals to induce micronuclei -- the genotoxicants mitomycin C (MMC), etoposide (ETOPO), and vinblastine (VB), and the non-genotoxicants sucrose (SUC), staurosporine (STS), and dexamethasone (DEX). The latter two non-genotoxicants were selected as extreme challenges to the assay because of their potent apoptogenic activity. Three collaborating laboratories were supplied with prototype In Vitro MicroFlow kits, and each was assigned one genotoxicant and one non-genotoxicant. Cells were treated continuously for 24h over a range of concentrations up to 5 mg/ml, or overtly cytotoxic concentrations. Micronuclei were scored via standard microscopy and flow cytometry. In addition to enumerating micronucleus frequencies, a cytotoxicity measurement that is simultaneously acquired with the flow cytometric micronucleus scoring procedure was evaluated (Flow-NBR). With this method, latex particles served as counting beads, and facilitated relative survival measurements that exclude the presence of dead/dying cells. For comparison purposes, additional cytotoxicity endpoints were measured, including several that are based on cell number, and others that reflect compromised membrane integrity, including dye permeability and/or phospholipid distribution. Key findings for this set of compounds include the following: (1) significant discrepancies in top concentration selection were found when cytotoxicity measurements were based on different methods, with the Flow-NBR approach tending to be the most sensitive, (2) both microscopy- and flow cytometry-based scoring methods detected concentration-dependent micronucleus formation for the three genotoxic agents studied, with good agreement between the reference laboratory and the collaborating laboratories, and (3) whereas flow cytometric analyses showed no significant increases for the non-genotoxicants when top concentration selection was based on Flow-NBR, significantly elevated micronucleus frequencies were observed for concentrations that were chosen based on less-sensitive cytotoxicity assays. Collectively, these results indicate that rapid assessment of genotoxicity can be accomplished with a relatively simple flow cytometric technique, and that the scoring system is transferable across laboratories. Furthermore, a concurrent assessment of cytotoxicity, Flow-NBR, may help reduce the occurrence of irrelevant positive results, as it may represent a more appropriate means for choosing top concentration levels. Finally, the data presented herein reinforce concerns about the manner in which cytotoxicity limits are described in guidance documents, since these recommendations tend to cite fixed cut-off values without reference to methodology.