Literature DB >> 28714573

Assessment of the DNA damaging potential of environmental chemicals using a quantitative high-throughput screening approach to measure p53 activation.

Kristine L Witt1, Jui-Hua Hsieh2, Stephanie L Smith-Roe1, Menghang Xia3, Ruili Huang3, Jinghua Zhao3, Scott S Auerbach1, Junguk Hur4, Raymond R Tice1.   

Abstract

Genotoxicity potential is a critical component of any comprehensive toxicological profile. Compounds that induce DNA or chromosomal damage often activate p53, a transcription factor essential to cell cycle regulation. Thus, within the US Tox21 Program, we screened a library of ∼10,000 (∼8,300 unique) environmental compounds and drugs for activation of the p53-signaling pathway using a quantitative high-throughput screening assay employing HCT-116 cells (p53+/+ ) containing a stably integrated β-lactamase reporter gene under control of the p53 response element (p53RE). Cells were exposed (-S9) for 16 hr at 15 concentrations (generally 1.2 nM to 92 μM) three times, independently. Excluding compounds that failed analytical chemistry analysis or were suspected of inducing assay interference, 365 (4.7%) of 7,849 unique compounds were concluded to activate p53. As part of an in-depth characterization of our results, we first compared them with results from traditional in vitro genotoxicity assays (bacterial mutation, chromosomal aberration); ∼15% of known, direct-acting genotoxicants in our library activated the p53RE. Mining the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database revealed that these p53 actives were significantly associated with increased expression of p53 downstream genes involved in DNA damage responses. Furthermore, 53 chemical substructures associated with genotoxicity were enriched in certain classes of p53 actives, for example, anthracyclines (antineoplastics) and vinca alkaloids (tubulin disruptors). Interestingly, the tubulin disruptors manifested unusual nonmonotonic concentration response curves suggesting activity through a unique p53 regulatory mechanism. Through the analysis of our results, we aim to define a role for this assay as one component of a comprehensive toxicological characterization of large compound libraries. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 58:494-507, 2017.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA damage response; HTS; genotoxicity; mutagenicity; p53 response element

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28714573      PMCID: PMC5555817          DOI: 10.1002/em.22112

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


  28 in total

1.  17-alpha-ethinylestradiol and norgestrel in combination induce micronucleus increases and aneuploidy in human lymphocyte and fibroblast cultures.

Authors:  N Bukvic; F Susca; D Bukvic; M Fanelli; G Guanti
Journal:  Teratog Carcinog Mutagen       Date:  2000

2.  International Conference on Harmonisation; guidance on S2(R1) Genotoxicity Testing and Data Interpretation for Pharmaceuticals intended for Human Use; availability. Notice.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  2012-06-07

3.  A Data Analysis Pipeline Accounting for Artifacts in Tox21 Quantitative High-Throughput Screening Assays.

Authors:  Jui-Hua Hsieh; Alexander Sedykh; Ruili Huang; Menghang Xia; Raymond R Tice
Journal:  J Biomol Screen       Date:  2015-04-22

4.  Mechanism of genotoxicity of diethylstilbestrol in vivo.

Authors:  A Gladek; J G Liehr
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1989-10-05       Impact factor: 5.157

5.  Vinblastine and diethylstilboestrol tested in the in vitro mammalian cell micronucleus test (MNvit) at Swansea University UK in support of OECD draft Test Guideline 487.

Authors:  George E Johnson; Gareth J Jenkins; Adam D Thomas; Shareen H Doak
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2009-08-08       Impact factor: 2.433

6.  Detection of the centromere in micronuclei by fluorescence in situ hybridization: its application to the human lymphocyte micronucleus assay after treatment with four suspected aneugens.

Authors:  L Migliore; L Cocchi; R Scarpato
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 3.000

7.  Identification of genotoxic compounds using isogenic DNA repair deficient DT40 cell lines on a quantitative high throughput screening platform.

Authors:  Kana Nishihara; Ruili Huang; Jinghua Zhao; Sampada A Shahane; Kristine L Witt; Stephanie L Smith-Roe; Raymond R Tice; Shunichi Takeda; Menghang Xia
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 3.000

8.  The Comparative Toxicogenomics Database's 10th year anniversary: update 2015.

Authors:  Allan Peter Davis; Cynthia J Grondin; Kelley Lennon-Hopkins; Cynthia Saraceni-Richards; Daniela Sciaky; Benjamin L King; Thomas C Wiegers; Carolyn J Mattingly
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 16.971

9.  Diverse stresses dramatically alter genome-wide p53 binding and transactivation landscape in human cancer cells.

Authors:  Daniel Menendez; Thuy-Ai Nguyen; Johannes M Freudenberg; Viju J Mathew; Carl W Anderson; Raja Jothi; Michael A Resnick
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 16.971

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
  11 in total

1.  Investigating the Generalizability of the MultiFlow ® DNA Damage Assay and Several Companion Machine Learning Models With a Set of 103 Diverse Test Chemicals.

Authors:  Steven M Bryce; Derek T Bernacki; Stephanie L Smith-Roe; Kristine L Witt; Jeffrey C Bemis; Stephen D Dertinger
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Genetic toxicology in silico protocol.

Authors:  Catrin Hasselgren; Ernst Ahlberg; Yumi Akahori; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Franck Atienzar; Scott Auerbach; Lisa Beilke; Phillip Bellion; Romualdo Benigni; Joel Bercu; Ewan D Booth; Dave Bower; Alessandro Brigo; Zoryana Cammerer; Mark T D Cronin; Ian Crooks; Kevin P Cross; Laura Custer; Krista Dobo; Tatyana Doktorova; David Faulkner; Kevin A Ford; Marie C Fortin; Markus Frericks; Samantha E Gad-McDonald; Nichola Gellatly; Helga Gerets; Véronique Gervais; Susanne Glowienke; Jacky Van Gompel; James S Harvey; Jedd Hillegass; Masamitsu Honma; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Chia-Wen Hsu; Tara S Barton-Maclaren; Candice Johnson; Robert Jolly; David Jones; Ray Kemper; Michelle O Kenyon; Naomi L Kruhlak; Sunil A Kulkarni; Klaus Kümmerer; Penny Leavitt; Scott Masten; Scott Miller; Chandrika Moudgal; Wolfgang Muster; Alexandre Paulino; Elena Lo Piparo; Mark Powley; Donald P Quigley; M Vijayaray Reddy; Andrea-Nicole Richarz; Benoit Schilter; Ronald D Snyder; Lidiya Stavitskaya; Reinhard Stidl; David T Szabo; Andrew Teasdale; Raymond R Tice; Alejandra Trejo-Martin; Anna Vuorinen; Brian A Wall; Pete Watts; Angela T White; Joerg Wichard; Kristine L Witt; Adam Woolley; David Woolley; Craig Zwickl; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 3.271

3.  Identifying Compounds with Genotoxicity Potential Using Tox21 High-Throughput Screening Assays.

Authors:  Jui-Hua Hsieh; Stephanie L Smith-Roe; Ruili Huang; Alexander Sedykh; Keith R Shockley; Scott S Auerbach; B Alex Merrick; Menghang Xia; Raymond R Tice; Kristine L Witt
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 3.739

4.  In Silico Approaches In Carcinogenicity Hazard Assessment: Current Status and Future Needs.

Authors:  Raymond R Tice; Arianna Bassan; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Marc A Beal; Phillip Bellion; Romualdo Benigni; Jeffrey Birmingham; Alessandro Brigo; Frank Bringezu; Lidia Ceriani; Ian Crooks; Kevin Cross; Rosalie Elespuru; David M Faulkner; Marie C Fortin; Paul Fowler; Markus Frericks; Helga H J Gerets; Gloria D Jahnke; David R Jones; Naomi L Kruhlak; Elena Lo Piparo; Juan Lopez-Belmonte; Amarjit Luniwal; Alice Luu; Federica Madia; Serena Manganelli; Balasubramanian Manickam; Jordi Mestres; Amy L Mihalchik-Burhans; Louise Neilson; Arun Pandiri; Manuela Pavan; Cynthia V Rider; John P Rooney; Alejandra Trejo-Martin; Karen H Watanabe-Sailor; Angela T White; David Woolley; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-23

5.  Identification of nonmonotonic concentration-responses in Tox21 high-throughput screening estrogen receptor assays.

Authors:  Zhenzhen Shi; Menghang Xia; Shuo Xiao; Qiang Zhang
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2022-08-19       Impact factor: 4.460

6.  A Quantitative High-Throughput Screening Data Analysis Pipeline for Activity Profiling.

Authors:  Ruili Huang
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

7.  Identification of p53 Activators in a Human Microarray Compendium.

Authors:  J Christopher Corton; Kristine L Witt; Carole L Yauk
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 3.973

8.  Next generation high throughput DNA damage detection platform for genotoxic compound screening.

Authors:  Peter Sykora; Kristine L Witt; Pooja Revanna; Stephanie L Smith-Roe; Jonathan Dismukes; Donald G Lloyd; Bevin P Engelward; Robert W Sobol
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Mining of high throughput screening database reveals AP-1 and autophagy pathways as potential targets for COVID-19 therapeutics.

Authors:  Hu Zhu; Catherine Z Chen; Srilatha Sakamuru; Jinghua Zhao; Deborah K Ngan; Anton Simeonov; Mathew D Hall; Menghang Xia; Wei Zheng; Ruili Huang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 10.  Application of In Vitro Metabolism Activation in High-Throughput Screening.

Authors:  Masato Ooka; Caitlin Lynch; Menghang Xia
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-10-31       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.