| Literature DB >> 30008028 |
Alice Limonciel1,2, Gamze Ates3, Giada Carta1,2, Anja Wilmes1,2, Manfred Watzele4, Peter J Shepard5, Harper C VanSteenhouse5, Bruce Seligmann5, Joanne M Yeakley5, Bob van de Water6, Mathieu Vinken7, Paul Jennings8,9.
Abstract
The utilisation of genome-wide transcriptomics has played a pivotal role in advancing the field of toxicology, allowing the mapping of transcriptional signatures to chemical exposures. These activities have uncovered several transcriptionally regulated pathways that can be utilised for assessing the perturbation impact of a chemical and also the identification of toxic mode of action. However, current transcriptomic platforms are not very amenable to high-throughput workflows due to, high cost, complexities in sample preparation and relatively complex bioinformatic analysis. Thus, transcriptomic investigations are usually limited in dose and time dimensions and are, therefore, not optimal for implementation in risk assessment workflows. In this study, we investigated a new cost-effective, transcriptomic assay, TempO-Seq, which alleviates the aforementioned limitations. This technique was evaluated in a 6-compound screen, utilising differentiated kidney (RPTEC/TERT1) and liver (HepaRG) cells and compared to non-transcriptomic label-free sensitive endpoints of chemical-induced disturbances, namely phase contrast morphology, xCELLigence and glycolysis. Non-proliferating cell monolayers were exposed to six sub-lethal concentrations of each compound for 24 h. The results show that utilising a 2839 gene panel, it is possible to discriminate basal tissue-specific signatures, generate dose-response relationships and to discriminate compound-specific and cell type-specific responses. This study also reiterates previous findings that chemical-induced transcriptomic alterations occur prior to cytotoxicity and that transcriptomics provides in depth mechanistic information of the effects of chemicals on cellular transcriptional responses. TempO-Seq is a robust transcriptomic platform that is well suited for in vitro toxicity experiments.Entities:
Keywords: Dedifferentiation; HepaRG; RPTEC/TERT1; Stress responses; TempO-Seq
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30008028 PMCID: PMC6063331 DOI: 10.1007/s00204-018-2256-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Toxicol ISSN: 0340-5761 Impact factor: 5.153
Concentrations of chemicals used with vehicle and ordering information
| Tested concentrations in µM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Ochratoxin A | Potassium Bromate | Cyclosporine A | Na valproate | Acetaminophen | Isoniazid |
| Short name | OTA | KBrO3 | CsA | VALP | APAP | ISZ |
| Dilution | ||||||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 0.001 | 80 | 0.05 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| 2 | 0.01 | 400 | 1 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
| 3 | 0.13 | 800 | 5 | 200 | 200 | 200 |
| 4 | 1 | 2000 | 10 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 |
| 5 | 10 | 4000 | 15 | 5000 | 5000 | 10,000 |
| Pre-stock | 2.48 mM | – | 15 mM | – | – | – |
| Vehicle | RPTEC/TERT1 Medium | RPTEC/TERT1 Medium | DMSO | HepaRG medium | HepaRG medium | HepaRG medium |
| Source | Sigma | Sigma | Calbiochem | Sigma | Sigma | Sigma |
| Cat No | O1877 | P7332 | 239835 | P4543 | A7302 | I3377 |
0–5 are the dilutions, all values are expressed in µM unless otherwise stated
Fig. 2xCELLigence, lactate production and morphology after 24 h single application exposures. a, b Impedance measurements utilising the xCELLigence system with the same concentrations as utilised for the transcriptomics study. The values are mean from three biological replicates. *Indicates a significant difference using a two-way ANOVA, using a Sidak’s post-test with a significant cut off of 0.05. c Supernatant lactate from the same cultures utilised in the transcriptomic study. Values are mean fold control (FC) ± standard deviation. *Indicates a significant difference using a one-way ANOVA, using a Dunnett’s post-test with a significant cut off of 0.05. d, e Phase contrast morphology of cells with the highest concentration of compounds
Fig. 1Comparison of HepaRG and RPTEC/TERT1 transcriptome. From a total of 3050 probes (inset a), probes were filtered for significant difference between the in vitro models (p value < 0.001) and with a coefficient of variance greater than 0.6. a Plot of HepaRG mRNA values against the corresponding RPTEC/TERT1 values. b Most abundant 15 genes from the 105 genes which are exclusively expressed in 1 model. All values are given in Table S2A and S2B
Fig. 3Effect of compounds on read counts (a), differential gene expression per treatment (b) and individual differential gene expression (c). The total read counts (×1000) are plotted versus concentration per cell model. b The number of total differentially expressed genes (with a significance cut off Benjamini Hochberg adjusted p > 0.05), are plotted versus concentration per cell model. The numeric values are given in the tables. c Heat map of log2 fold control data from 1514 genes that were significantly altered in 2 or more conditions. The heat map is sorted by the sum across all conditions per gene. R is RPTEC/TERT1, H is HepaRG. The red colour indicates increased and blue decreased, where white is unchanged. Where the log2 fold control could not be calculated (i.e., a division by zero error where all values zero in the control) the value is also represented by a white. The values at the bottom of the heat map are the sum of the DEGs over the 5 concentrations per cell line (maximum possible is 7570). The values behind the heat map with the gene annotations are given in Table S4
Fig. 4Representation of compound-induced differentially expressed genes using ToxPi visualisations. The ToxPi v 2 software was used to generate the diagrams. The top panel shows a full pie with its colour codes and gene numbers each slice uses the linear model. DEP is differentially expressed probes. The numbers for p53, Nrf2 and ATF4 represent the no. of genes allocated to those pathways (see Table S3). On the right of the top panel is a Hierarchical Clustering using ward.D2. Labelling of samples is compound code, the dilution (as per Table 1), R for RPTEC/TERT1 and H for HepaRG The lower panels show the ToxPis per cell type, compound and concentrations, where numbers represent the µM concentration of the corresponding compound. The ToxPi data are given in Table S5.
Fig. 5Concentration response relationships of selected genes, representing a stress response pathways, b HepaRG-specific and c RPTEC/TERT1-specific. In the graphs the values are expressed as mean mRNA expression ± SEM. In the heat map values represent the mean log2 fold control with red representing the highest value and blue the lowest. White represents either 0 or absent. Statistical significance to control (p < 0.05) is denoted by * for RPTEC/TERT1 and # for HepaRG using a one-way ANOVA, with a Dunnett’s post-test and significant cut off of 0.05