Literature DB >> 10633184

Thresholds in genotoxicity responses.

L Henderson1, S Albertini, M Aardema.   

Abstract

It has been commonly accepted that risk assessments of genotoxic chemicals are based on linear extrapolation methods. However, there is substantial evidence that some chemicals may be genotoxic only at high doses by mechanisms that do not occur at low doses, or only under specific conditions in genotoxicity assays, but are inactive at concentrations within the range of human exposure levels. There are a variety of possible mechanisms of thresholded genotoxicity, including disruption of cell division and chromosome segregation, inhibition of DNA synthesis, overloading of oxidative defence mechanisms, metabolism or plasma binding capacity, disturbances of metal homeostasis, cytotoxicity and physiological perturbations in in vivo assays. The degrees of evidence supporting the proposed mechanisms are variable and not all are sufficiently robust to be universally accepted as yet by the scientific community. However, a survey of industrial companies indicated that data have been accepted by some regulatory authorities indicating thresholds contributing to genotoxicity responses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10633184     DOI: 10.1016/s1383-5718(99)00173-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutat Res        ISSN: 0027-5107            Impact factor:   2.433


  5 in total

Review 1.  Voluntary exploratory data submissions to the US FDA and the EMA: experience and impact.

Authors:  Federico M Goodsaid; Shashi Amur; Jiri Aubrecht; Michael E Burczynski; Kevin Carl; Jennifer Catalano; Rosane Charlab; Sandra Close; Catherine Cornu-Artis; Laurent Essioux; Albert J Fornace; Lois Hinman; Huixiao Hong; Ian Hunt; David Jacobson-Kram; Ansar Jawaid; David Laurie; Lawrence Lesko; Heng-Hong Li; Klaus Lindpaintner; James Mayne; Peter Morrow; Marisa Papaluca-Amati; Timothy W Robison; John Roth; Ina Schuppe-Koistinen; Leming Shi; Olivia Spleiss; Weida Tong; Sharada L Truter; Jacky Vonderscher; Agnes Westelinck; Li Zhang; Issam Zineh
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 84.694

2.  Pro-oxidant induced DNA damage in human lymphoblastoid cells: homeostatic mechanisms of genotoxic tolerance.

Authors:  Anna L Seager; Ume-Kulsoom Shah; Jane M Mikhail; Bryant C Nelson; Bryce J Marquis; Shareen H Doak; George E Johnson; Sioned M Griffiths; Paul L Carmichael; Sharon J Scott; Andrew D Scott; Gareth J S Jenkins
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 3.  Setting Occupational Exposure Limits for Genotoxic Substances in the Pharmaceutical Industry.

Authors:  Ester Lovsin Barle; Gian Christian Winkler; Susanne Glowienke; Azeddine Elhajouji; Jana Nunic; Hans-Joerg Martus
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Collaborative study of thresholds for mutagens: proposal of a typical protocol for detection of hormetic responses in cytotoxicity tests.

Authors:  Shizuyo Sutou; Akiko Koeda; Kana Komatsu; Toshiyuki Shiragiku; Hiroshi Seki; Kohji Yamakage; Takeru Niitsuma; Toshiyuki Kudo; Akihiro Wakata
Journal:  Genes Environ       Date:  2018-10-08

5.  Microbial Mutagenicity Assay: Ames Test.

Authors:  Urvashi Vijay; Sonal Gupta; Priyanka Mathur; Prashanth Suravajhala; Pradeep Bhatnagar
Journal:  Bio Protoc       Date:  2018-03-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.