Literature DB >> 20740635

New and emerging technologies for genetic toxicity testing.

Anthony M Lynch1, Jennifer C Sasaki, Rosalie Elespuru, David Jacobson-Kram, Véronique Thybaud, Marlies De Boeck, Marilyn J Aardema, Jiri Aubrecht, R Daniel Benz, Stephen D Dertinger, George R Douglas, Paul A White, Patricia A Escobar, Albert Fornace, Masamitsu Honma, Russell T Naven, James F Rusling, Robert H Schiestl, Richard M Walmsley, Eiji Yamamura, Jan van Benthem, James H Kim.   

Abstract

The International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) Project Committee on the Relevance and Follow-up of Positive Results in In Vitro Genetic Toxicity (IVGT) Testing established an Emerging Technologies and New Strategies Workgroup to review the current State of the Art in genetic toxicology testing. The aim of the workgroup was to identify promising technologies that will improve genotoxicity testing and assessment of in vivo hazard and risk, and that have the potential to help meet the objectives of the IVGT. As part of this initiative, HESI convened a workshop in Washington, DC in May 2008 to discuss mature, maturing, and emerging technologies in genetic toxicology. This article collates the abstracts of the New and Emerging Technologies Workshop together with some additional technologies subsequently considered by the workgroup. Each abstract (available in the online version of the article) includes a section addressed specifically to the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with the respective technology. Importantly, an overview of the technologies and an indication of how their use might be aligned with the objectives of IVGT are presented. In particular, consideration was given with regard to follow-up testing of positive results in the standard IVGT tests (i.e., Salmonella Ames test, chromosome aberration assay, and mouse lymphoma assay) to add weight of evidence and/or provide mechanism of action for improved genetic toxicity risk assessments in humans.
Copyright © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20740635     DOI: 10.1002/em.20614

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen        ISSN: 0893-6692            Impact factor:   3.216


  22 in total

1.  When pigs fly: immunomagnetic separation facilitates rapid determination of Pig-a mutant frequency by flow cytometric analysis.

Authors:  Stephen D Dertinger; Steven M Bryce; Souk Phonethepswath; Svetlana L Avlasevich
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 2.433

Review 2.  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

3.  Comparison of male versus female responses in the Pig-a mutation assay.

Authors:  Carson Labash; Svetlana L Avlasevich; Kristine Carlson; Dorothea K Torous; Ariel Berg; Jeffrey C Bemis; James T MacGregor; Stephen D Dertinger
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.000

Review 4.  Scientific assessment of the use of sugars as cigarette tobacco ingredients: a review of published and other publicly available studies.

Authors:  Ewald Roemer; Matthias K Schorp; Jean-Jacques Piadé; Jeffrey I Seeman; Donald E Leyden; Hans-Juergen Haussmann
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 5.635

5.  High-throughput metabolic genotoxicity screening with a fluidic microwell chip and electrochemiluminescence.

Authors:  Dhanuka P Wasalathanthri; Spundana Malla; Itti Bist; Chi K Tang; Ronaldo C Faria; James F Rusling
Journal:  Lab Chip       Date:  2013-12-07       Impact factor: 6.799

6.  Modern Approaches to Chemical Toxicity Screening.

Authors:  Eli G Hvastkovs; James F Rusling
Journal:  Curr Opin Electrochem       Date:  2017-04-03

7.  The Extended ToxTracker Assay Discriminates Between Induction of DNA Damage, Oxidative Stress, and Protein Misfolding.

Authors:  Giel Hendriks; Remco S Derr; Branislav Misovic; Bruno Morolli; Fabienne M G R Calléja; Harry Vrieling
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 4.849

8.  Microfluidic electrochemical array for detection of reactive metabolites formed by cytochrome P450 enzymes.

Authors:  Dhanuka P Wasalathanthri; Vigneshwaran Mani; Chi K Tang; James F Rusling
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 6.986

9.  Opportunities to integrate new approaches in genetic toxicology: an ILSI-HESI workshop report.

Authors:  Errol Zeiger; Bhaskar Gollapudi; Marilyn J Aardema; Scott Auerbach; Darrell Boverhof; Laura Custer; Peter Dedon; Masamitsu Honma; Seiichi Ishida; Andrea L Kasinski; James H Kim; Mugimane G Manjanatha; Jennifer Marlowe; Stefan Pfuhler; Igor Pogribny; William Slikker; Leon F Stankowski; Jennifer Y Tanir; Raymond Tice; Jan van Benthem; Paul White; Kristine L Witt; Véronique Thybaud
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 3.216

10.  Paper-based electrochemiluminescent screening for genotoxic activity in the environment.

Authors:  Vigneshwaran Mani; Karteek Kadimisetty; Spundana Malla; Amit A Joshi; James F Rusling
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 9.028

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.