Literature DB >> 32608486

Pig-a gene mutation assay study design: critical assessment of 3- versus 28-day repeat-dose treatment schedules.

Azeddine Elhajouji1, Tamsanqa Tafara Hove1, Oliver O'Connell1, Hansjoerg Martus1, Stephen D Dertinger2.   

Abstract

The in vivo Pig-a assay is being used in safety studies to evaluate the potential of chemicals to induce somatic cell gene mutations. Ongoing work is aimed at developing an Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) test guideline to support routine use for regulatory purposes (OECD project number 4.93). Among the details that will need to be articulated in an eventual guideline are recommended treatment and harvest schedules. With this in mind, experiments reported herein were performed with Wistar Han rats exposed to aristolochic acid I (AA), 1,3-propane sultone, chlorambucil, thiotepa or melphalan using each of two commonly used treatment schedules: 3 or 28 consecutive days. In the case of the 3-day studies, blood was collected for Pig-a analysis on days 15 or 16 and 29 or 30. For the 28-day studies blood was collected on day 29 or 30. The effect of treatment on mutant reticulocytes and mutant erythrocytes was evaluated with parametric pair-wise tests. While each of the five mutagens increased mutant phenotype cell frequencies irrespective of study design, statistical significance was consistently achieved at lower dose levels when the 28-day format was used (e.g. 2.75 vs 20 mg/kg/bw for AA). To more thoroughly investigate the dose-response relationships, benchmark dose (BMD) analyses were performed with PROAST software. These results corroborate the pair-wise testing results in that lower BMD values were obtained with the 28-day design. Finally, mutagenic potency, as measured by BMD analyses, most consistently correlated with the mutagens' tumorigenic dose 50 values when the lengthier treatment schedule was used. Collectively, these results suggest that both 3- and 28-day treatment schedules have merit in hazard identification-type studies. That being said, for the purpose of regulatory safety assessments, there are clear advantages to study designs that utilise protracted exposures.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the UK Environmental Mutagen Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32608486      PMCID: PMC7486680          DOI: 10.1093/mutage/geaa014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutagenesis        ISSN: 0267-8357            Impact factor:   3.000


  19 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

2.  Need and potential value of the Pig-ain vivo mutation assay-a HESI perspective.

Authors:  Maik Schuler; B Bhaskar Gollapudi; Véronique Thybaud; James H Kim
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 3.216

3.  Confirmation of Pig-a mutation in flow cytometry-identified CD48-deficient T-lymphocytes from F344 rats.

Authors:  Javier Revollo; Mason G Pearce; Dayton M Petibone; Roberta A Mittelstaedt; Vasily N Dobrovolsky
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.000

4.  Interlaboratory Pig-a gene mutation assay trial: Studies of 1,3-propane sultone with immunomagnetic enrichment of mutant erythrocytes.

Authors:  Stephen D Dertinger; Souk Phonethepswath; Pamela Weller; Svetlana Avlasevich; Dorothea K Torous; Jared A Mereness; Steven M Bryce; Jeffrey C Bemis; Sara Bell; Susan Portugal; Michael Aylott; James T MacGregor
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2011-08-29       Impact factor: 3.216

5.  The in vivo Pig-a gene mutation assay, a potential tool for regulatory safety assessment.

Authors:  Vasily N Dobrovolsky; Daishiro Miura; Robert H Heflich; Stephen D Dertinger
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2010 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 3.216

6.  The in vivo Pig-a assay: A report of the International Workshop On Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT) Workgroup.

Authors:  B Bhaskar Gollapudi; Anthony M Lynch; Robert H Heflich; Stephen D Dertinger; Vasily N Dobrovolsky; Roland Froetschl; Katsuyoshi Horibata; Michelle O Kenyon; Takafumi Kimoto; David P Lovell; Leon F Stankowski; Paul A White; Kristine L Witt; Jennifer Y Tanir
Journal:  Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 2.873

7.  Pig-a mutation: kinetics in rat erythrocytes following exposure to five prototypical mutagens.

Authors:  Souk Phonethepswath; Dean Franklin; Dorothea K Torous; Steven M Bryce; Jeffrey C Bemis; Sarojini Raja; Svetlana Avlasevich; Pamela Weller; Ollivier Hyrien; James Palis; James T Macgregor; Stephen D Dertinger
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2009-12-04       Impact factor: 4.849

8.  Characterization of genomic PIG-A gene: a gene for glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchor biosynthesis and paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria.

Authors:  Y Iida; J Takeda; T Miyata; N Inoue; J Nishimura; T Kitani; K Maeda; T Kinoshita
Journal:  Blood       Date:  1994-06-01       Impact factor: 22.113

9.  Development of an in vivo gene mutation assay using the endogenous Pig-A gene: I. Flow cytometric detection of CD59-negative peripheral red blood cells and CD48-negative spleen T-cells from the rat.

Authors:  Daishiro Miura; Vasily N Dobrovolsky; Yoshinori Kasahara; Yasuhiro Katsuura; Robert H Heflich
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.216

10.  IWGT report on quantitative approaches to genotoxicity risk assessment I. Methods and metrics for defining exposure-response relationships and points of departure (PoDs).

Authors:  James T MacGregor; Roland Frötschl; Paul A White; Kenny S Crump; David A Eastmond; Shoji Fukushima; Melanie Guérard; Makoto Hayashi; Lya G Soeteman-Hernández; Toshio Kasamatsu; Dan D Levy; Takeshi Morita; Lutz Müller; Rita Schoeny; Maik J Schuler; Véronique Thybaud; George E Johnson
Journal:  Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 2.873

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.