Literature DB >> 18602493

Comparison of different methods for an accurate assessment of cytotoxicity in the in vitro micronucleus test. II: Practical aspects with toxic agents.

Michael D Fellows1, Michael R O'Donovan, Elisabeth Lorge, David Kirkland.   

Abstract

Appropriate measures of cytotoxicity need to be used when selecting test concentrations in in vitro genotoxicity assays. Underestimation of toxicity may lead to inappropriately toxic concentrations being selected for analysis, with the potential for generation of irrelevant positive results. As guidance for the in vitro micronucleus test is being developed, it is clearly important to compare the different measures of cytotoxicity that can be used both with and without cytokinesis blocking. Therefore, relative cell counts (RCC), relative increase in cell counts (RICC) and relative population doubling (RPD) for treatments without cytokinesis block were compared with replication index (RI) for treatments with cytokinesis block, and the corresponding induction of micronucleated cells was evaluated. A wide range of chemicals and gamma irradiation were used, and in almost all cases, RCC underestimated cytotoxicity when compared with all other measures such that RCC would have resulted in the selection of inappropriately high concentrations for micronuclei analysis. In the absence of cytokinesis block, RICC or RPD is more comparable with RI with cytokinesis block, and therefore considered more appropriate measure of survival. Furthermore, using these estimations of cytotoxicity and the limit of 50% survival, all the mutagens and aneugens tested were appropriately identified as positive in the in vitro micronucleus assay. Accordingly, it was clear that testing beyond 50% survival was not necessary to identify the potential of these agents to induce micronuclei.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18602493     DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2008.06.004

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  How accurate is in vitro prediction of carcinogenicity?

Authors:  Richard Maurice Walmsley; Nicholas Billinton
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 8.739

2.  Look back in anger - what clinical studies tell us about preclinical work.

Authors:  Thomas Hartung
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 6.043

Review 3.  Utility of a next-generation framework for assessment of genomic damage: A case study using the pharmaceutical drug candidate etoposide.

Authors:  John Nicolette; Mirjam Luijten; Jennifer C Sasaki; Laura Custer; Michelle Embry; Roland Froetschl; George Johnson; Gladys Ouedraogo; Raja Settivari; Veronique Thybaud; Kerry L Dearfield
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 3.579

4.  Development and validation of a high-throughput transcriptomic biomarker to address 21st century genetic toxicology needs.

Authors:  Heng-Hong Li; Renxiang Chen; Daniel R Hyduke; Andrew Williams; Roland Frötschl; Heidrun Ellinger-Ziegelbauer; Raegan O'Lone; Carole L Yauk; Jiri Aubrecht; Albert J Fornace
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  A novel in vitro 3D model of the human bone marrow to bridge the gap between in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity testing.

Authors:  Alexander R Vernon; Roy M Pemberton; H Ruth Morse
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 2.954

6.  Novel Prognostic Biomarkers in Metastatic and Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Micronuclei Frequency and Telomerase Activity in Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes.

Authors:  Taxiarchis Konstantinos Nikolouzakis; Elena Vakonaki; Polychronis D Stivaktakis; Athanasios Alegakis; Aikaterini Berdiaki; Nikolaos Razos; John Souglakos; Aristidis Tsatsakis; John Tsiaoussis
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  Mutation Analysis in Cultured Cells of Transgenic Rodents.

Authors:  Ahmad Besaratinia; Albert Zheng; Steven E Bates; Stella Tommasi
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  Primary mesenchymal stromal cells in co-culture with leukaemic HL-60 cells are sensitised to cytarabine-induced genotoxicity, while leukaemic cells are protected.

Authors:  Liana E Gynn; Elizabeth Anderson; Gareth Robinson; Sarah A Wexler; Gillian Upstill-Goddard; Christine Cox; Jennifer E May
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 3.000

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.