Literature DB >> 21527772

Genomic profiling uncovers a molecular pattern for toxicological characterization of mutagens and promutagens in vitro.

Kathleen Boehme1, Yasmin Dietz, Philip Hewitt, Stefan O Mueller.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the suitability of global gene expression profiling for the characterization and identification of mutagens and promutagens in vitro. To enable detection of both mutagenic and promutagenic compounds, we cotreated HepG2 cells with a rat liver S9 fraction as metabolic activation system (MAS), supplementing the limited drug metabolic capability of HepG2 cells. Illumina BeadChip arrays were used to quantify gene expression changes after treatment with three well-known mutagenic, three promutagenic, as well as two non-genotoxic reference compounds for a period of 24 or 48 h. Statistical data analysis revealed 91 genes being most representative for the (pro-)genotoxic response. Several processes such as cellular differentiation and the complex interactive regulation of the stress and DNA damage response via the transcriptional modulators STAT1, SP1, and P53 were differentially regulated. The gene set evaluated was further used to predict the genotoxic characteristics of N-nitrosodiethylamine (DEN) after its metabolic activation. Although no clear response could be established in P53 activation experiments, DEN was classified correctly as nongenotoxic without S9 and genotoxic in the presence of the MAS by means of its transcriptomic pattern. Our data support that mechanistic profiling in vitro is a useful tool compared with single endpoint detections to predict genotoxicity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21527772     DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfr090

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Sci        ISSN: 1096-0929            Impact factor:   4.849


  5 in total

1.  Integration of metabolic activation with a predictive toxicogenomics signature to classify genotoxic versus nongenotoxic chemicals in human TK6 cells.

Authors:  Julie K Buick; Ivy Moffat; Andrew Williams; Carol D Swartz; Leslie Recio; Daniel R Hyduke; Heng-Hong Li; Albert J Fornace; Jiri Aubrecht; Carole L Yauk
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 3.216

2.  Variation in DNA-Damage Responses to an Inhalational Carcinogen (1,3-Butadiene) in Relation to Strain-Specific Differences in Chromatin Accessibility and Gene Transcription Profiles in C57BL/6J and CAST/EiJ Mice.

Authors:  Grace A Chappell; Jennifer W Israel; Jeremy M Simon; Sebastian Pott; Alexias Safi; Karl Eklund; Kenneth G Sexton; Wanda Bodnar; Jason D Lieb; Gregory E Crawford; Ivan Rusyn; Terrence S Furey
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 9.031

3.  Comparative Analysis of Transcriptional Responses to Genotoxic and Non-Genotoxic Agents in the Blood Cell Model TK6 and the Liver Model HepaRG.

Authors:  Katrin Kreuzer; Heike Sprenger; Albert Braeuning
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  Application of the TGx-28.65 transcriptomic biomarker to classify genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals in human TK6 cells in the presence of rat liver S9.

Authors:  Carole L Yauk; Julie K Buick; Andrew Williams; Carol D Swartz; Leslie Recio; Heng-Hong Li; Albert J Fornace; Errol M Thomson; Jiri Aubrecht
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 3.216

5.  A Qualitative Modeling Approach for Whole Genome Prediction Using High-Throughput Toxicogenomics Data and Pathway-Based Validation.

Authors:  Saad Haider; Michael B Black; Bethany B Parks; Briana Foley; Barbara A Wetmore; Melvin E Andersen; Rebecca A Clewell; Kamel Mansouri; Patrick D McMullen
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-10-02       Impact factor: 5.810

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.