Comparison of the results of a modified miniscreen and the standard bacterial reverse mutation assays

Diehl, Marilyn S.; Willaby, Sylvia L.; Snyder, Ronald D.

doi:10.1002/1098-2280(2000)36:1<72::aid-em10>3.0.co;2-y

Cited by 51 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Over the years, this recognition for the Salmonella assay resulted in a plethora of modifications that have enabled the assay to be used in an almost infinite variety of ways. These include modifications permitting a ) the use of small amounts of sample (Diehl et al 2000; Flamand et al 2001; Green et al 1977; Houk et al 1989; Kado et al 1983) in semi–high-throughput modes involving colorimetric analysis (Kamber et al 2009; Umbuzeiro et al 2010) and fluorescent assays (Aubrecht et al 2007; Cariello et al 1998); b ) the testing of volatiles and gases (Baden et al 1976; Hughes et al 1987); c ) the testing of body fluids, including urine (Cerná and Pastorková 2002), feces (de Kok and van Maanen 2000), breast milk (Phillips et al 2002; Thompson et al 2002), breast nipple aspirates (Klein et al 2001), and cervical mucus (Holly et al 1993); d ) the testing of all types of complex mixtures, including air, soil, water, house dust, and combustion emissions (see “Paradigm Shift II” above), and fried meat (Knize and Felton 2005); e ) molecular (DeMarini 2000; Koch et al 1994) and genomic analyses (Porwollik et al 2001; Ward et al 2010); and f ) the evaluation of mutagenicity inside the International Space Station (Rabbow et al 2003). This flexibility has permitted the Salmonella assay to be used for almost every conceivable type of environmental and molecular epidemiology study.…”

Section: The Salmonella Assay As a Model For 21st Century Toxicology mentioning

confidence: 99%

TheSalmonellaMutagenicity Assay: The Stethoscope of Genetic Toxicology for the 21st Century

Claxton

Umbuzeiro

DeMarini

2010

Environ Health Perspect

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesAccording to the 2007 National Research Council report Toxicology for the Twenty-First Century, modern methods (e.g., “omics,” in vitro assays, high-throughput testing, computational methods) will lead to the emergence of a new approach to toxicology. The Salmonella mammalian microsome mutagenicity assay has been central to the field of genetic toxicology since the 1970s. Here we document the paradigm shifts engendered by the assay, the validation and applications of the assay, and how the assay is a model for future in vitro toxicology assays.Data sourcesWe searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge using key words relevant to the Salmonella assay and additional genotoxicity assays.Data extractionWe merged the citations, removing duplicates, and categorized the papers by year and topic.Data synthesisThe Salmonella assay led to two paradigm shifts: that some carcinogens were mutagens and that some environmental samples (e.g., air, water, soil, food, combustion emissions) were mutagenic. Although there are > 10,000 publications on the Salmonella assay, covering tens of thousands of agents, data on even more agents probably exist in unpublished form, largely as proprietary studies by industry. The Salmonella assay is a model for the development of 21st century in vitro toxicology assays in terms of the establishment of standard procedures, ability to test various agents, transferability across laboratories, validation and testing, and structure–activity analysis.ConclusionsSimilar to a stethoscope as a first-line, inexpensive tool in medicine, the Salmonella assay can serve a similar, indispensable role in the foreseeable future of 21st century toxicology.

show abstract

Section: The Salmonella Assay As a Model For 21st Century Toxicology mentioning

confidence: 99%

TheSalmonellaMutagenicity Assay: The Stethoscope of Genetic Toxicology for the 21st Century

Claxton

Umbuzeiro

DeMarini

2010

Environ Health Perspect

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The modified microscreen method of Diehl et al (2000) was utilized with modifications as described by Ferruzzi et al (2002). Salmonella typhimurium TA98 (Moltox; Boone, NC, USA) was utilized as the test strain.…”

Section: Antimutagenicity Assaymentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytochemical profiling and phase II enzyme-inducing properties of Thunbergia laurifolia Lindl. (RC) extracts

Oonsivilai

Cheng

Bomser

et al. 2007

Journal of Ethnopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While not optimal under current regulatory guidance, 2-strain data has been shown to give good coverage and be highly concordant with the 5-strain assay. 9,29,30 Internally, we have also found high concordance between 2-strain and 5-strain data (data not shown). The Ames data reported in Tables 2 -5 was collected prior to publication of the ICH M7 guidance.…”

Section: -Strain Ames Vs 2-strain Ames Testingmentioning

confidence: 91%

Boronic Acids and Derivatives—Probing the Structure–Activity Relationships for Mutagenicity

Hansen

Jolly

Linder

2015

Org. Process Res. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a recent publication describing boronic acids as a "novel class of bacterial mutagen," process and analytical chemists may not be aware of the potential worker exposure hazards, or of the need to assess boron compounds as potential genotoxic impurities (GTIs) per ICH M7. This publication provides new Ames data for 44 commercially available boronic acids, boronic acid derivatives, and boron containing reagents. Trends in the Ames data are discussed from a structure-activity perspective. Common reagents such as bis(pinacolato)diboron and bisboronic acid were shown to be mutagenic in the Ames assay. Currently available in silico computational models were found to provide little value in predicting the outcome of the Ames assay for boronic acids and derivatives. We propose oxygen mediated oxidation of boron compounds to generate organic radicals as a potential mechanism for mutagenicity. It is hoped that this paper will result in increased awareness of this class of GTIs, and prompt publication of additional Ames data for boronic acids and their derivatives that will lead to improved (Q)SAR models, and an understanding of the mechanism of mutagenicity.KEY WORDS GTI, mutagen, Ames, boron, boronic acid, (Q)SAR

show abstract

Comparison of the results of a modified miniscreen and the standard bacterial reverse mutation assays

Cited by 51 publications

References 5 publications

TheSalmonellaMutagenicity Assay: The Stethoscope of Genetic Toxicology for the 21st Century

TheSalmonellaMutagenicity Assay: The Stethoscope of Genetic Toxicology for the 21st Century

Phytochemical profiling and phase II enzyme-inducing properties of Thunbergia laurifolia Lindl. (RC) extracts

Boronic Acids and Derivatives—Probing the Structure–Activity Relationships for Mutagenicity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About