Literature DB >> 19857797

In vivo genotoxicity of EMS: statistical assessment of the dose response curves.

Elmar Gocke1, Michael Wall.   

Abstract

EMS induced micronuclei and lacZ mutations in in vivo studies in mice with a clearly sublinear dose dependency. As reported elsewhere in this issue, NOEL dose values of between 25 mg/kg/day and 80 mg/kg/day were observed for the different endpoints and tissues analysed. Here we show that statistical assessment of the data provides solid support that the induction of mutagenic and clastogenic effects after in vivo treatment with the directly DNA damaging mutagen EMS adheres to a thresholded dose response relation. These data corroborate similar evidence obtained in in vitro studies. We conclude that cells are fully capable of repairing large amounts of DNA ethylations induced by EMS without experiencing elevated mutation frequencies. The stochastic, linear risk assessment model generally employed for DNA damaging genotoxins can therefore be refuted for EMS. While presently this conclusion cannot be generalized to other genotoxins a change of paradigm appears to be indicated at least for alkylating agents inducing a comparable type and spectrum of DNA lesions as EMS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19857797     DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.03.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Lett        ISSN: 0378-4274            Impact factor:   4.372


  8 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

Review 2.  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

3.  Refractory status epilepticus, serious rhabdomyolysis, acute liver injury, and pancytopenia after a massive intake of ethyl methanesulfonate: a case report.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Yamazaki; Shogo Tajima; Takahiro Takeuchi
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

4.  Is nelfinavir exposure associated with cancer incidence in HIV-positive individuals?

Authors:  David C Boettiger; Caroline A Sabin; Andrew Grulich; Lene Ryom; Fabrice Bonnet; Peter Reiss; Antonella d'arminio Monforte; Ole Kirk; Andrew Phillips; Mark Bower; Gerd Fätkenheuer; Jens D Lundgren; Matthew Law
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2016-06-19       Impact factor: 4.177

5.  Elevated ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) in nelfinavir mesylate (Viracept, Roche): overview.

Authors:  Anton Pozniak; Lutz Müller; Miklos Salgo; Judith K Jones; Peter Larson; David Tweats
Journal:  AIDS Res Ther       Date:  2009-08-06       Impact factor: 2.250

6.  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

7.  A mode-of-action approach for the identification of genotoxic carcinogens.

Authors:  Lya G Hernández; Jan van Benthem; George E Johnson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Derivation of point of departure (PoD) estimates in genetic toxicology studies and their potential applications in risk assessment.

Authors:  G E Johnson; L G Soeteman-Hernández; B B Gollapudi; O G Bodger; K L Dearfield; R H Heflich; J G Hixon; D P Lovell; J T MacGregor; L H Pottenger; C M Thompson; L Abraham; V Thybaud; J Y Tanir; E Zeiger; J van Benthem; P A White
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 3.216

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.