Literature DB >> 19616119

Dose-response and operational thresholds/NOAELs for in vitro mutagenic effects from DNA-reactive mutagens, MMS and MNU.

Lynn H Pottenger1, Melissa R Schisler, Fagen Zhang, Michael J Bartels, Donald D Fontaine, Lisa G McFadden, B Bhaskar Gollapudi.   

Abstract

The dose-response relationships for in vitro mutagenicity induced by methylmethanesulfonate (MMS) or methylnitrosourea (MNU) in L5178Y mouse lymphoma (ML) cells were examined. DNA adducts (N7-methylguanine, N7MeG and O(6)-methylguanine, O(6)MeG) were quantified as biomarkers of exposure. Both endpoints were assessed using 5replicates/dose (4-h treatment) with MMS or MNU (0.0069-50muM), or vehicle (1% DMSO). Mutant frequency (MF) (thymidine kinase (TK) locus) was determined using the soft agar cloning methodology and a 2-day expression period; in addition, microwell and Sequester-Express-Select (SES) methods were used for MMS. Isolated DNA was acid-hydrolyzed, and adducts quantified by LC/ESI-MS/MS, using authentic and internal standards. MF dose-responses were analyzed using several statistical approaches, all of which confirmed that a threshold dose-response model provided the best fit. NOAELs for MF were 10muM MMS and 0.69muM MNU, based on ANOVA and Dunnett's test (p<0.05). N7MeG adducts were present in all cell samples, including solvent-control cells, and were increased over control levels in cells treated with >/=10muM MMS or 3.45muM MNU. O(6)MeG levels were only quantifiable at >/=10muM MNU; O(6)MeG was not quantifiable in control or MMS-treated cells at current detection limits. Thus, (1) cells treated with </=0.69muM MNU or </=10muM MMS did not demonstrate increases in TK(-) MF, but did demonstrate quantifiable levels of N7MeG adducts; and (2) the levels of N7MeG adducts did not correlate with induced MF, as MNU-treated cells had fewer N7MeG adducts but higher MF compared with MMS-treated cells, for quasi-equimolar doses. Taken together, these results demonstrate operational thresholds, defined as the highest dose for which the response is not significantly (statistically or biologically) distinguishable from the control/background values, for induction of mutations and N7MeG adducts in ML cells treated with MMS or MNU, and a lack of correlation between induced MF and levels of N7MeG adducts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19616119     DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2009.07.002

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


  14 in total

1.  Defining EMS and ENU dose-response relationships using the Pig-a mutation assay in rats.

Authors:  Krista L Dobo; Ronald D Fiedler; William C Gunther; Catherine J Thiffeault; Zoryana Cammerer; Stephanie L Coffing; Thomas Shutsky; Maik Schuler
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 2.433

2.  Biomarkers of exposure and effect in human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells following [13C2]-acetaldehyde exposure.

Authors:  Benjamin C Moeller; Leslie Recio; Amanda Green; Wei Sun; Fred A Wright; Wanda M Bodnar; James A Swenberg
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2013-02-19       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

Review 4.  Mode of action-based risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens.

Authors:  Andrea Hartwig; Michael Arand; Bernd Epe; Sabine Guth; Gunnar Jahnke; Alfonso Lampen; Hans-Jörg Martus; Bernhard Monien; Ivonne M C M Rietjens; Simone Schmitz-Spanke; Gerlinde Schriever-Schwemmer; Pablo Steinberg; Gerhard Eisenbrand
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 5.153

5.  Miniaturized flow cytometric in vitro micronucleus assay represents an efficient tool for comprehensively characterizing genotoxicity dose-response relationships.

Authors:  Steven M Bryce; Svetlana L Avlasevich; Jeffrey C Bemis; Souk Phonethepswath; Stephen D Dertinger
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2010-09-06       Impact factor: 2.433

6.  Gene-modified embryonic stem cell test to characterize chemical risks.

Authors:  Kohei Kitada; Akane Kizu; Takeshi Teramura; Toshiyuki Takehara; Masami Hayashi; Daisuke Tachibana; Hideki Wanibuchi; Shoji Fukushima; Masayasu Koyama; Kayo Yoshida; Takashi Morita
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 7.  Contributions of DNA repair and damage response pathways to the non-linear genotoxic responses of alkylating agents.

Authors:  Joanna Klapacz; Lynn H Pottenger; Bevin P Engelward; Christopher D Heinen; George E Johnson; Rebecca A Clewell; Paul L Carmichael; Yeyejide Adeleye; Melvin E Andersen
Journal:  Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res       Date:  2015-12-02       Impact factor: 5.657

8.  Influence of DNA repair on nonlinear dose-responses for mutation.

Authors:  Adam D Thomas; Gareth J S Jenkins; Bernd Kaina; Owen G Bodger; Karl-Heinz Tomaszowski; Paul D Lewis; Shareen H Doak; George E Johnson
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 9.  Advancing human health risk assessment: integrating recent advisory committee recommendations.

Authors:  Michael Dourson; Richard A Becker; Lynne T Haber; Lynn H Pottenger; Tiffany Bredfeldt; Penelope A Fenner-Crisp
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.635

10.  Profiling dose-dependent activation of p53-mediated signaling pathways by chemicals with distinct mechanisms of DNA damage.

Authors:  Rebecca A Clewell; Bin Sun; Yeyejide Adeleye; Paul Carmichael; Alina Efremenko; Patrick D McMullen; Salil Pendse; O J Trask; Andy White; Melvin E Andersen
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 4.849

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.