Guidance on aneugenicity assessment.

The EFSA Scientific Committee was asked to provide guidance on the most appropriate in vivo tests to follow up on positive in vitro results for aneugenicity, and on the approach to risk assessment for substances that are aneugenic but not clastogenic nor causing gene mutations. The Scientific Committee confirmed that the preferred approach is to perform an in vivo mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus test with a relevant route of administration. If this is positive, it demonstrates that the substance is aneugenic in vivo. A negative result with evidence that the bone marrow is exposed to the test substance supports a conclusion that aneugenic activity is not expressed in vivo. If there is no evidence of exposure to the bone marrow, a negative result is viewed as inconclusive and further studies are required. The liver micronucleus assay, even though not yet fully validated, can provide supporting information for substances that are aneugenic following metabolic activation. The gastrointestinal micronucleus test, conversely, to be further developed, may help to assess aneugenic potential at the initial site of contact for substances that are aneugenic in vitro without metabolic activation. Based on the evidence in relation to mechanisms of aneugenicity, the Scientific Committee concluded that, in principle, health-based guidance values can be established for substances that are aneugenic but not clastogenic nor causing gene mutations, provided that a comprehensive toxicological database is available. For situations in which the toxicological database is not sufficient to establish health-based guidance values, some approaches to risk assessment are proposed. The Scientific Committee recommends further development of the gastrointestinal micronucleus test, and research to improve the understanding of aneugenicity to support risk assessment.

Scientific Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR Panel) on the genotoxic potential of triazine amine (metabolite common to several sulfonylurea active substances).

The Panel received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the genotoxic potential of triazine amine based on available information submitted by the applicants. Available information includes experimental genotoxicity data on triazine amine, Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) analysis and read across with structurally similar compounds. Based on the overall weight of evidence, the Panel, in agreement with the cross-cutting Working Group Genotoxicity, concluded that there is no concern for the potential of triazine amine to induce gene mutations and clastogenicity; however, the potential to induce aneugenicity was not adequately investigated. For a conclusion, an in vitro micronucleus assay performed with triazine amine would be needed.

Editorial: Exploring the need to include microbiomes into EFSA's scientific assessments.

The communities of microorganisms and their genomes in a defined environment are collectively referred to as microbiomes (Marchesi and Ravel, 2015). They include representatives from the Bacteria, Archaea, lower and higher Eukarya, and viruses, and are found in most environments such as soils, aquatic habitats, surfaces and specific lumen of plants, animals and humans. According to ongoing studies, microbiome structures and dynamics across the food system can have both direct and indirect effects on human and animal health, in addition to their impact on food quality, safety and sustainability (CNBBSV concept paper, 2019). Moreover, recent research projects have offered new insights into the associations between microbiomes and a wide range of human diseases as well as their possible impact in modulating the exposure to environmental chemicals. As one of the core tasks of EFSA is to assess risks to human and animal health and/or the environment from substances linked to food and feed production, the increasing understanding of the role of microbiomes in health calls for a prospective mapping of their roles into regulatory scientific assessment processes with a view to understanding their potential health impact.

Genotoxicity assessment of chemical mixtures.

The EFSA Scientific Committee addressed in this document the peculiarities related to the genotoxicity assessment of chemical mixtures. The EFSA Scientific Committee suggests that first a mixture should be chemically characterised as far as possible. Although the characterisation of mixtures is relevant also for other toxicity aspects, it is particularly significant for the assessment of genotoxicity. If a mixture contains one or more chemical substances that are individually assessed to be genotoxic in vivo via a relevant route of administration, the mixture raises concern for genotoxicity. If a fully chemically defined mixture does not contain genotoxic chemical substances, the mixture is of no concern with respect to genotoxicity. If a mixture contains a fraction of chemical substances that have not been chemically identified, experimental testing of the unidentified fraction should be considered as the first option or, if this is not feasible, testing of the whole mixture should be undertaken. If testing of these fraction(s) or of the whole mixture in an adequately performed set of in vitro assays provides clearly negative results, the mixture does not raise concern for genotoxicity. If in vitro testing provides one or more positive results, an in vivo follow-up study should be considered. For negative results in the in vivo follow-up test(s), the possible limitations of in vivo testing should be weighed in an uncertainty analysis before reaching a conclusion of no concern with respect to genotoxicity. For positive results in the in vivo follow-up test(s), it can be concluded that the mixture does raise a concern about genotoxicity.

Genotoxicity testing approaches for the safety assessment of substances used in food contact materials prior to their authorization in the European Union.

Food contact materials are all materials and articles intended to come directly or indirectly into contact with food. Before being included in the positive European "Union list" of authorized substances (monomers, other starting substances and additives) for plastic food contact materials, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) must assess their safety "in use". If relevant for risk, the safety of the main impurities, reaction and degradation products originating from the manufacturing process is also evaluated. Information on genotoxicity is always required irrespective of the extent of migration and the resulting human exposure, in view of the theoretical lack of threshold for genotoxic events. The 2008 EFSA approach, requiring the testing of food contact materials in three in vitro mutagenicity tests, though still acceptable, is now superseded by the 2011 EFSA Scientific Committee's recommendation for only two complementary tests including a bacterial gene mutation test and an in vitro micronucleus test, to detect two main genetic endpoints (i.e., gene mutations and chromosome aberrations). Follow-up of in vitro positive results depends on the type of genetic effect and on the substance's systemic availability. In this study, we provide an analysis of the data on genotoxicity testing gathered by EFSA on food contact materials for the period 1992-2015. We also illustrate practical examples of the approaches that EFSA took when evaluating "non standard" food contact chemicals (e.g., polymeric additives, oligomer or other reaction mixtures, and nanosubstances). Additionally, EFSA's experience gained from using non testing methods and/or future possibilities in this area are discussed. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 58:361-374, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Clarification of some aspects related to genotoxicity assessment.

The European Commission requested EFSA to provide advice on the following: (1) the suitability of the unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS) in vivo assay to follow-up positive results in in vitro gene mutation tests; (2) the adequacy to demonstrate target tissue exposure in in vivo studies, particularly in the mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus test; (3) the use of data in a weight-of-evidence approach to conclude on the genotoxic potential of substances and the consequent setting of health-based guidance values. The Scientific Committee concluded that the first question should be addressed in both a retrospective and a prospective way: for future assessments, it is recommended no longer performing the UDS test. For re-assessments, if the outcome of the UDS is negative, the reliability and significance of results should be carefully evaluated in a weight-of-evidence approach, before deciding whether more sensitive tests such as transgenic assay or in vivo comet assay would be needed to complete the assessment. Regarding the second question, the Scientific Committee concluded that it should be addressed in lines of evidence of bone marrow exposure: toxicity to the bone marrow in itself provides sufficient evidence to allow concluding on the validity of a negative outcome of a study. All other lines of evidence of target tissue exposure should be assessed within a weight-of-evidence approach. Regarding the third question, the Scientific Committee concluded that any available data that may assist in reducing the uncertainty in the assessment of the genotoxic potential of a substance should be taken into consideration. If the overall evaluation leaves no concerns for genotoxicity, health-based guidance values may be established. However, if concerns for genotoxicity remain, establishing health-based guidance values is not considered appropriate.

Scientific motivations and criteria to consider updating EFSA scientific assessments.

EFSA is committed to assess and communicate the risks occurring in the food and feed chain from farm to fork and to provide other forms of scientific advice. This work, carried out by EFSA since its inception, has resulted in the adoption of thousands of scientific assessments. EFSA is obliged to re-assess past assessments in specific regulatory contexts such as those on food and feed additives, active substances in plant protection products and genetically modified food and feed. In other sectors, the consideration for updating past EFSA scientific assessments is taken on an ad hoc basis mainly depending on specific requests by risk managers or on EFSA self-tasking. If safety is potentially at stake in any area within EFSA's remit, the readiness to update past scientific assessments is important to keep EFSA at the forefront of science and to promote an effective risk assessment. Although this task might be very complex and resource demanding, it is fundamental to EFSA's mission. The present EFSA Scientific Committee opinion deals with scientific motivations and criteria to contribute to the timely updating of EFSA scientific assessments. It is recognised that the decision for updating should be agreed following careful consideration of all the relevant elements by the EFSA management, in collaboration with risk managers and stakeholders. The present opinion addresses the scientific approaches through which it would be possible for EFSA to increase the speed and effectiveness of the acquisition of new data, as well as, to improve the consequent evaluations to assess the relevance and reliability of new data in the context of contributing to the better definition of whether to update past scientific assessments.

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.

How to reduce false positive results when undertaking in vitro genotoxicity testing and thus avoid unnecessary follow-up animal tests: Report of an ECVAM Workshop.

Workshop participants agreed that genotoxicity tests in mammalian cells in vitro produce a remarkably high and unacceptable occurrence of irrelevant positive results (e.g. when compared with rodent carcinogenicity). As reported in several recent reviews, the rate of irrelevant positives (i.e. low specificity) for some studies using in vitro methods (when compared to this "gold standard") means that an increased number of test articles are subjected to additional in vivo genotoxicity testing, in many cases before, e.g. the efficacy (in the case of pharmaceuticals) of the compound has been evaluated. If in vitro tests were more predictive for in vivo genotoxicity and carcinogenicity (i.e. fewer false positives) then there would be a significant reduction in the number of animals used. Beyond animal (or human) carcinogenicity as the "gold standard", it is acknowledged that genotoxicity tests provide much information about cellular behaviour, cell division processes and cellular fate to a (geno)toxic insult. Since the disease impact of these effects is seldom known, and a verification of relevant toxicity is normally also the subject of (sub)chronic animal studies, the prediction of in vivo relevant results from in vitro genotoxicity tests is also important for aspects that may not have a direct impact on carcinogenesis as the ultimate endpoint of concern. In order to address the high rate of in vitro false positive results, a 2-day workshop was held at the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), Ispra, Italy in April 2006. More than 20 genotoxicity experts from academia, government and industry were invited to review data from the currently available cell systems, to discuss whether there exist cells and test systems that have a reduced tendency to false positive results, to review potential modifications to existing protocols and cell systems that might result in improved specificity, and to review the performance of some new test systems that show promise of improved specificity without sacrificing sensitivity. It was concluded that better guidance on the likely mechanisms resulting in positive results that are not biologically relevant for human health, and how to obtain evidence for those mechanisms, is needed both for practitioners and regulatory reviewers. Participants discussed the fact that cell lines commonly used for genotoxicity testing have a number of deficiencies that may contribute to the high false positive rate. These include, amongst others, lack of normal metabolism leading to reliance on exogenous metabolic activation systems (e.g. Aroclor-induced rat S9), impaired p53 function and altered DNA repair capability. The high concentrations of test chemicals (i.e. 10 mM or 5000 microg/ml, unless precluded by solubility or excessive toxicity) and the high levels of cytotoxicity currently required in mammalian cell genotoxicity tests were discussed as further potential sources of false positive results. Even if the goal is to detect carcinogens with short in vitro tests under more or less acute conditions, it does not seem logical to exceed the capabilities of cellular metabolic turnover, activation and defence processes. The concept of "promiscuous activation" was discussed. For numerous mutagens, the decisive in vivo enzymes are missing in vitro. However, if the substrate concentration is increased sufficiently, some other enzymes (that are unimportant in vivo) may take over the activation-leading to the same or a different active metabolite. Since we often do not use the right enzyme systems for positive controls in vitro, we have to rely on their promiscuous activation, i.e. to use excessive concentrations to get an empirical correlation between genotoxicity and carcinogenicity. A thorough review of published and industry data is urgently needed to determine whether the currently required limit concentration of 10mM or 5000 microg/ml, and high levels of cytotoxicity, are necessary for the detection of in vivo genotoxins and DNA-reactive, mutagenic carcinogens. In addition, various measures of cytotoxicity are currently allowable under OECD test guidelines, but there are few comparative data on whether different measures would result in different maximum concentrations for testing. A detailed comparison of cytotoxicity assessment strategies is needed. An assessment of whether test endpoints can be selected that are not intrinsically associated with cytotoxicity, and therefore are less susceptible to artefacts produced by cytotoxicity, should also be undertaken. There was agreement amongst the workshop participants that cell systems which are p53 and DNA-repair proficient, and have defined Phase 1 and Phase 2 metabolism, covering a broad set of enzyme forms, and used within the context of appropriately set limits of concentration and cytotoxicity, offer the best hope for reduced false positives. Whilst there is some evidence that human lymphocytes are less susceptible to false positives than the current rodent cell lines, other cell systems based on HepG2, TK6 and MCL-5 cells, as well as 3D skin models based on primary human keratinocytes also show some promise. Other human cell lines such as HepaRG, and human stem cells (the target for carcinogenicity) have not been used for genotoxicity investigations and should be considered for evaluation. Genetic engineering is also a valuable tool to incorporate missing enzyme systems into target cells. A collaborative research programme is needed to identify, further develop and evaluate new cell systems with appropriate sensitivity but improved specificity. In order to review current data for selection of appropriate top concentrations, measures and levels of cytotoxicity, metabolism, and to be able to improve existing or validate new assay systems, the participants called for the establishment of an expert group to identify the in vivo genotoxins and DNA-reactive, mutagenic carcinogens that we expect our in vitro genotoxicity assays to detect as well as the non-genotoxins and non-carcinogens we expect them not to detect.

Modulation of different stress pathways after styrene and styrene-7,8-oxide exposure in HepG2 cell line and normal human hepatocytes.

Styrene is one of the most important monomers produced worldwide. IARC classified styrene as a possible carcinogen to humans (group 2B). Styrene-7,8-oxide (SO) is the main reactive metabolite of styrene, and it is found to be genotoxic in several in vitro test systems. Styrene and styrene-7,8-oxide (SO) toxicity to HepG2 cells was investigated by evaluating end-points such as heat shock proteins (Hsps), metallothioneins (MT), apoptosis-related proteins, accumulation of styrene within the cells and expression of two isoforms of cytochrome P450. The potential activity of styrene and styrene-7,8-oxide in modulating gene expression was also investigated. The results showed induction of Hsp70, metallothioneins, BclX(S/L) and c-myc expression and a decrease in Bax expression in HepG2 after treatments, confirming that these compounds activated protective mechanisms. Moreover, up-regulation of TGFbeta2 and TGFbetaRIII in HepG2 cells was found after exposure to styrene, while in human primary hepatocytes these genes were down-regulated after both treatments. Finally, it was found that styrene and SO treatments did not induce CYP1A2 and CYP2E1 protein expression. In conclusion, both compounds caused toxic stress in HepG2 cells, with SO being more toxic; in the meantime, a different effect of the two compounds in HepG2 cells and primary human hepatocytes was observed regarding their activity in gene modulation.

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.

The tumor suppressor gene TP53: implications for cancer management and therapy.

The p53 protein is an inducible transcription factor with multiple anti-proliferative roles in response to genotoxic damage; unprogrammed proliferative stimuli; and deprivation of oxygen, nutrients, or ribonucleotides. Inactivation of the TP53 gene by mutation or deletion is the most common event in human cancer. Loss of p53 function compromises genetic homeostasis in cells exposed to mutagens and prevents normal cytotoxic responses to cancer therapies. Genetic and pharmacological approaches are being developed with the ultimate goal of restoring or controlling p53 functions in cancer patients. Genetic interventions aiming at expressing wild-type TP53 in cancer cells, either by retroviral or adenoviral transfer, have met limited clinical success. However, recently, the use of a defective adenovirus (ONYX-015) that selectively kills p53-incompetent cells has shown promising effects in pre-clinical and clinical studies. Pharmacological methods are under development to either stimulate wild-type p53 protein function or induce p53 mutant proteins to resume wild-type functions. These methods are based on small chemicals (CP-31388, PRIMA-1), peptides (CDB3), or single-chain Fv antibody fragments corresponding to defined p53 domains. In addition, detection of mutant TP53 may also serve as a marker for early cancer detection, prediction, and prognosis. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms underlying these approaches and their perspectives for cancer therapy.

New insights into the mechanisms involved in renal proximal tubular damage induced in vitro by ochratoxin A.

The mycotoxin ochratoxin A is a contaminant of human and animal food products. It is a potent nephrotoxin known to damage the proximal tubule. The aim of this work was to investigate the effects of ochratoxin A on a porcine renal proximal tubular epithelial cell line (LLC-PK1), and to identify sensitive endpoints revealing damage at the epithelial barrier level and at the molecular level. Cells exposed for 24 h to 5-10 microM ochratoxin indicated a clear damage to the intactness of the epithelial barrier, as shown by measurements of trans-epithelial resistance and zonula occludens-1 protein expression. At the mitochondrial level we observed alterations of the normal functions, such as an increase of the membrane potential, the formation of straight extensions, and the formation of giant mitochondria. At higher ochratoxin concentrations (50 microM), at which cytotoxicity assays revealed a significant toxicity, alterations of the cytoskeleton organization and induction of apoptosis were evident. In addition, we analyzed the expression of genes by using a cDNA macroarray. Our data indicate that ochratoxin-induced nephrotoxicity can be detected at the barrier and at the mitochondrial level at rather low concentrations, at which conventional cytotoxicity assays are unable to reveal toxic effects.

Initiation of human astrocytoma by clonal evolution of cells with progressive loss of p53 functions in a patient with a 283H TP53 germ-line mutation: evidence for a precursor lesion.

Little is known about the genetic and molecular events leading to the early stages of human astrocytoma formation. To examine this issue, we analyzed the significance of sequential accumulation of two somatic point mutations (R267W and E258D) in the TP53 gene during the initiation of astrocytoma in a patient born with a single germ-line p53 point mutation (R283H). We adapted a p53 transcriptional assay in yeast to establish the temporal occurrence and allelic distribution of the p53 mutations present in the patient and characterized these mutations through functional assays and structural modeling. Our results show that the first somatic mutation occurred at codon 267 on the p53 allele harboring the germ-line mutation R283H, whereas the second somatic mutation occurred in the remaining wild-type (wt) allele at codon 258. These two mutations induced the formation of tumor cells with the genotype p53(267W+283H/258D), which comprised 70% of the cells in the primary WHO grade II astrocytoma. Another 8% of cells within the tumor had the partially mutated genotype p53(267W+283H/WT) and represented the remnants of a clinically undetectable intermediate stage of astrocytic neoplastic transformation. The remaining 22% of cells had the constitutive p53(283H/WT) genotype and likely consisted of nontumor cells. Functional analysis of the p53 alleles present in the patient's tumor indicated that the germ-line p53(R283H) could transactivate the CDKN1A((p21, WAF1, cip1, SDI1)) but not the BAX gene and retained the ability to induce growth arrest of human glioblastoma cells. The p53(R267W+R283H) and p53(E258D) were incapable of transactivating either promoter or inducing growth arrest. Modeling of p53 interaction with DNA suggests that R283H mutation may weaken the sequence-specific interaction of p53 lysine 120 with the BAX gene but not the CDKN1A p53-responsive elements. Taken together, these results have characterized, for the first time, the genetic events defining a clinically undetectable precursor lesion leading to a grade II astrocytoma. They also suggest that astrocytoma initiation in this patient resulted from monoclonal evolution driven by a sequential loss of proapoptotic and growth arrest functions of p53.

Restoration of wild-type conformation and activity of a temperature-sensitive mutant of p53 (p53(V272M)) by the cytoprotective aminothiol WR1065 in the esophageal cancer cell line TE-1.

The aminothiol WR1065, the active metabolite of the cytoprotector amifostine, exerts its antimutagenic effects through free-radical scavenging and other unknown mechanisms. In an earlier report, we showed that WR1065 activates wild-type p53 in MCF-7 cells, leading to p53-dependent arrest in the G(1) phase of the cell cycle. To determine whether WR1065 activates p53 by modulating protein conformation, we analyzed its effects on p53 conformation and activity in the esophageal cancer cell line TE-1. This cell line contains a mutation in codon 272 of p53 (p53(V272M), with methionine instead of a valine), conferring temperature-sensitive properties to the p53 protein. At the nonpermissive temperature (37 degrees C), p53(V272M) adopts the mutant p53 conformation (nonreactive with the antibody PAb1620), does not bind specifically to DNA, and is not activated in response to DNA-damaging treatment. However, treatment with 0.5-4 mM WR1065 partially restored wild-type conformation at 37 degrees C, stimulated DNA binding activity, and increased the expression of p53 target genes WAF-1, GADD45, and MDM2, leading to cell-cycle arrest in G(1). These results suggest that WR1065 activates p53 through a mechanism distinct from DNA-damage signaling, which involves modulation of p53 protein conformation.