Background The repeated-dose liver micronucleus (RDLMN) assay is an effective and important in vivo test for detecting genotoxic compounds, particularly for those that require metabolic activation to show genotoxicity. In a collaborative study by the Collaborative Study Group for the Micronucleus Test (CSGMT)/The Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society (JEMS) – Mammalian Mutagenicity Study Group (MMS), micronucleus induction of 22 chemicals with the RDLMN assay employing the collagenase digestion method was examined and reported on. Recently, we have developed a method which enables retrospective evaluation of micronucleus induction in formalin-fixed liver tissues (the formalin-fixed method) obtained in general toxicity studies completed in the past. Using this method, we were able to easily evaluate clastogenic potential of chemicals from the formalin-fixed tissues obtained in the general toxicity studies. In this study, to evaluate the usefulness of the formalin-fixed method, we have conducted a liver micronucleus assay using the formalin-fixed liver samples obtained from the above collaborative study (18 of 22 test chemicals) and carried out a comparison with the results obtained by the collagenase digestion method. Results Comparison of the collagenase digestion and formalin-fixed methods was conducted using the results of the micronucleus assays with a total of 18 test chemicals which included 12 genotoxic hepatocarcinogens (Group A), 4 genotoxic carcinogens but not liver targeted (Group B), and 2 nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogens (Group C). The formalin-fixed method obtained the similar results as the collagenase digestion method in 10 out of the 12 chemicals of Group A, and all chemicals of Group B and Group C. Although the results were statistically contradictive due to different levels of concurrent negative control, the 2 other chemicals of Group A showed comparable responses between the two methods. Conclusion The present study shows that the formalin-fixed method is capable of detecting liver carcinogens with sensitivity equal to or higher than that of the collagenase digestion method. We recommend use of the formalin-fixed method because of its capability of enabling retrospective evaluation of micronucleus induction in the formalin-fixed liver tissues obtained in general toxicity studies completed in the past.
The Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society/the Mammalian Mutagenicity Study group conducted a collaborative study to investigate whether cell nuclei or whole cells might be more suitably used to correctly detect genotoxic chemicals in the in vivo rodent alkaline Comet assay. Four participating laboratories applied four sample processing methods, i.e., three homogenization methods using the usual Potter-type shaft, a customized (loose) Pottertype shaft, or a Downs-loose-type shaft, for preparing cell nuclei, and the mesh membrane method for preparing whole cells, to the male rat liver. Homogenization with the usual Potter-type shaft clearly produced damage of the cell nuclei and DNA, while the other three methods seemed to provide similar conditions of the tissue samples. The proportion of cell nuclei: whole cells was 80-90%: 10-20% in all laboratories when the samples were prepared by homogenization using a Downs-loose-type shaft or by the mesh membrane method. The %DNA in tail were comparable in both samples among the negative control groups (single oral administration with physiological saline) of all laboratories, and showed an equal degree of increase in both samples of the ethyl methanesulfonate groups (single oral administration at 250 mg/kg) in all laboratories. In conclusion, the homogenization method using a loosely customized Potter-type shaft or a Downsloose-type shaft, and the mesh membrane method would be equally acceptable for the in vivo rodent alkaline Comet assay.
Background Conflicting results between bacterial mutagenicity tests (the Ames test) and mammalian carcinogenicity tests might be due to species differences in metabolism, genome structure, and DNA repair systems. Mutagenicity assays using human cells are thought to be an advantage as follow-up studies for positive results in Ames tests. In this collaborative study, a thymidine kinase gene mutation study (TK6 assay) using human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells, established in OECD TG490, was used to examine 10 chemicals that have conflicting results in mutagenicity studies (a positive Ames test and a negative result in rodent carcinogenicity studies). Results Two of 10 test substances were negative in the overall judgment (20% effective as a follow-up test). Three of these eight positive substances were negative after the short-term treatment and positive after the 24 h treatment, despite identical treatment conditions without S9. A toxicoproteomic analysis of TK6 cells treated with 4-nitroanthranilic acid was thus used to aid the interpretation of the test results. This analysis using differentially expressed proteins after the 24 h treatment indicated that in vitro specific oxidative stress is involved in false positive response in the TK6 assay. Conclusions The usefulness of the TK6 assay, by current methods that have not been combined with new technologies such as proteomics, was found to be limited as a follow-up test, although it still may help to reduce some false positive results (20%) in Ames tests. Thus, the combination analysis with toxicoproteomics may be useful for interpreting false positive results raised by 24 h specific reactions in the assay, resulting in the more reduction (> 20%) of false positives in Ames test.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.