| Literature DB >> 34595563 |
Franz Oesch1,2, Daniela Fruth3,4, Jan G Hengstler5, Eric Fabian3, Franz Ingo Berger6, Robert Landsiedel7.
Abstract
N-vinyl pyrrolidone (NVP) is produced up to several thousand tons per year as starting material for the production of polymers to be used in pharmaceutics, cosmetics and food technology. Upon inhalation NVP was carcinogenic in the rat, liver tumor formation is starting already at the rather low concentration of 5 ppm. Hence, differentiation whether NVP is a genotoxic carcinogen (presumed to generally have no dose threshold for the carcinogenic activity) or a non-genotoxic carcinogen (with a potentially definable threshold) is highly important. In the present study, therefore, the existing genotoxicity investigations on NVP (all showing consistently negative results) were extended and complemented with investigations on possible alternative mechanisms, which also all proved negative. All tests were performed in the same species (rat) using the same route of exposure (inhalation) and the same doses of NVP (5, 10 and 20 ppm) as had been used in the positive carcinogenicity test. Specifically, the tests included an ex vivo Comet assay (so far not available) and an ex vivo micronucleus test (in contrast to the already available micronucleus test in mice here in the same species and by the same route of application as in the bioassay which had shown the carcinogenicity), tests on oxidative stress (non-protein-bound sulfhydryls and glutathione recycling test), mechanisms mediated by hepatic receptors, the activation of which had been shown earlier to lead to carcinogenicity in some instances (Ah receptor, CAR, PXR, PPARα). No indications were obtained for any of the investigated mechanisms to be responsible for or to contribute to the observed carcinogenicity of NVP. The most important of these exclusions is genotoxicity. Thus, NVP can rightfully be regarded and treated as a non-genotoxic carcinogen and threshold approaches to the assessment of this chemical are supported. However, the mechanism underlying the carcinogenicity of NVP in rats remains unclear.Entities:
Keywords: Carcinogenicity; Comet assay; Genotoxicity; Micronucleus; N-vinylpyrrolidone; Non-genotoxic carcinogen
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34595563 PMCID: PMC8536644 DOI: 10.1007/s00204-021-03151-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Toxicol ISSN: 0340-5761 Impact factor: 5.153
Summary on the incidence of neoplasms in Sprague–Dawley rats treated by inhalation with N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone for 24 months
| Sex | Male | Female | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exposure concentration (ppm) | 0 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 20 |
| Number of animals | 70 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 70 | 60 | 60 | 60 |
| Nasal cavity | ||||||||
| Adenoma | 0 | 9** | 9*** | 11*** | 0 | 2 | 8** | 14*** |
| Adenocarcinoma | 0 | 0 | 4* | 6* | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4* |
| Liver | ||||||||
| Hepatocellular carcinoma | 1 | 6* | 5* | 17*** | 1 | 3 | 6* | 26*** |
| Larynx Squamous carcinoma | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
Data from Klimisch et al. (1997a)
*P < 0.05
**P < 0.01
***P < 0.001
Fig. 1Structure of N-vinylpyrrolidone (NVP)
Achieved NVP concentrations in the inhalation chambers
| Exposure day | Intended concentrations | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 ppm | 10 ppm | 20 ppm | |
| Achieved concentrations | |||
| 0 | 4.40 ± 0.3 | 9.10 ± 1.1 | 17.90 ± 0.8 |
| 1 | 2.90 ± 1.3 | 6.40 ± 1.6 | 16.30 ± 2.3 |
| 2 | 4.30 ± 0.2 | 760 ± 0.7 | 15.60 ± 1.8 |
| 3 | 5.80 ± 0.1 | 11.70 ± 0.6 | 21.30 ± 0.1 |
| 4 | 5.80 ± 0.2 | 12.10 ± 0.6 | 20.50 ± 2.4 |
| 5 | 5.30 ± 1.3 | 11.30 ± 1.7 | 22.20 ± 0.7 |
Fig. 2Histological examination of NVP-treated versus untreated rat liver
Micronuclei in bone marrow after treatment of rats with NVP or the positive control substance EMS
| NVP dose | MN/ 1000 PCE | PCE/1000 Erythrozyten | PCE/NCE quotient (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Range | ||||
| 0 ppm | M | 1.8 ± 1.1 | 0.0–3.0 | 609 ± 29 | 100 |
| F | 2.3 ± 0.6 | 1.5–3.0 | 636 ± 48 | 100 | |
| 5 ppm | M | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 1.5–4.0 | 609 ± 40 | 100 |
| F | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 0.5–2.5 | 629 ± 18 | 99 | |
| 10 ppm | M | 2.9 ± 1.9 | 1.5–6.5 | 622 ± 33 | 102 |
| F | 1.7 ± 1.0 | 0.5–3.0 | 612 ± 44 | 96 | |
| 20 ppm | M | 2.0 ± 0.9 | 0.5–3.0 | 553 ± 57 | 90 |
| F | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 1.0–3.0 | 615 ± 48 | 97 | |
| EMS | M | 14.5 ± 6.0 | 3.0–20.0 | 616 ± 50 | 101 |
| F | 11.8 ± 12.3 | 9.0–14.5 | 563 ± 29 | 89 | |
NVP, N-vinyl pyrrolidone; MN, micronuclei; PCE, polychromatic erythrocytes; NCE, normochromatic erythrocytes; SD, standard deviation; EMS, ethyl methanesulfonate (200 mg/kg body weight)
Comet assaysa in the liver of male Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 1 | 91 | 94 ± 2 | 3 ± 2 | 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.34 |
| 2 | 96 | 1.1 | ||||
| 3 | 96 | 0.6 | ||||
| 4 | 94 | 1.1 | ||||
| 5 | 96 | 0.7 | ||||
| 6 | 93 | 0.5 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 7 | 90 | 95 ± 3 | 3 ± 2 | 1.1 | 0.9 ± 0.22 |
| 8 | 92 | 1.2 | ||||
| 9 | 96 | 0.9 | ||||
| 10 | 96 | 0.6 | ||||
| 11 | 98 | 0.7 | ||||
| 12 | 96 | 0.9 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 13 | 96 | 96 ± 1 | 3 ± 1 | 0.7 | 1.0 ± 0.68 |
| 14 | 97 | 2.4 | ||||
| 15 | 96 | 0.7 | ||||
| 16 | 98 | 1.0 | ||||
| 17 | 96 | 0.6 | ||||
| 18 | 94 | 0.7 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 19 | 98 | 97 ± 1 | 3 ± 1 | 1.2 | 0.7 ± 0.34 |
| 20 | 95 | 0.8 | ||||
| 21 | 99 | 0.5 | ||||
| 22 | 95 | 0.5 | ||||
| 23 | 98 | 1.0 | ||||
| 24 | 96 | 0.3 | ||||
EMSc (Positivecontrol) | 49 | 91 | 95 ± 3 | 8 ± 2 | 18.9 | 18.6 ± 5.97 |
| 50 | 94 | 17.5 | ||||
| 51 | 95 | 29.0 | ||||
| 52 | 96 | 10.6 | ||||
| 53 | 99 | 19.3 | ||||
| 54 | 94 | 16.4 |
aConventional assays (no FPG added)
bMean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
cEMS, ethyl methanesulfonate
Comet assaysa in the liver of female Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 25 | 91 | 95 ± 3 | 4 ± 2 | 1.0 | 0.6 ± 0.30 |
| 26 | 100 | 0.7 | ||||
| 27 | 98 | 0.4 | ||||
| 28 | 96 | 0.9 | ||||
| 29 | 93 | 0.6 | ||||
| 30 | 94 | 0.2 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 31 | 98 | 97 ± 1 | 3 ± 3 | 0.6 | 1.0 ± 0.40 |
| 32 | 98 | 0.9 | ||||
| 33 | 96 | 1.1 | ||||
| 34 | 99 | 1.7 | ||||
| 35 | 97 | 0.8 | ||||
| 36 | 95 | 0.8 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 37 | 96 | 96 ± 1 | 4 ± 4 | 1.3 | 0.9 ± 0.48 |
| 38 | 99 | 0.6 | ||||
| 39 | 95 | 0.5 | ||||
| 40 | 97 | 1.4 | ||||
| 41 | 94 | 1.3 | ||||
| 42 | 96 | 0.3 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 43 | 96 | 97 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 0.7 | 0.7 ± 0.34 |
| 44 | 97 | 1.3 | ||||
| 45 | 97 | 0,5 | ||||
| 46 | 98 | 0,5 | ||||
| 47 | 96 | 1,0 | ||||
| 48 | 95 | 0.4 | ||||
EMSc (Positivecontrol) | 55 | 99 | 96 ± 2 | 7 ± 4 | 9.1 | 16.3 ± 4.49 |
| 56 | 95 | 13.6 | ||||
| 57 | 96 | 17.5 | ||||
| 58 | 95 | 22.4 | ||||
| 59 | 97 | 17.8 | ||||
| 60 | 97 | 17.3 |
aconventional assays (no FPG added)
bMean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
cEMS, ethyl methanesulfonate
Comet assaysa in the lung of male Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 1 | 97 | 98 ± 1 | 6 ± 3 | 1.2 | 1.2 ± 0.47 |
| 2 | 99 | 1.0 | ||||
| 3 | 99 | 2.1 | ||||
| 4 | 99 | 0.8 | ||||
| 5 | 98 | 1.0 | ||||
| 6 | 98 | 0.9 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 7 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 4 ± 3 | 1.9 | 1,1 ± 0.61 |
| 8 | 97 | 1.8 | ||||
| 9 | 99 | 0.6 | ||||
| 10 | 99 | 0.7 | ||||
| 11 | 97 | 0.7 | ||||
| 12 | 100 | 0.8 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 13 | 99 | 98 ± 2 | 7 ± 5 | 5.7 | 1.8 ± 1.94 |
| 14 | 99 | 1.3 | ||||
| 15 | 98 | 1.2 | ||||
| 16 | 99 | 0.7 | ||||
| 17 | 93 | 1.0 | ||||
| 18 | 99 | 1.1 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 19 | 100 | 99 ± 1 | 3 ± 1 | 0.4 | 0.6 ± 0.28 |
| 20 | 100 | 0.9 | ||||
| 21 | 98 | 0.9 | ||||
| 22 | 97 | 0.6 | ||||
| 23 | 99 | 0.3 | ||||
| 24 | 100 | 0.4 | ||||
EMSc (Positivecontrol) | 49 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 9 ± 4 | 20.7 | 19.3 ± 5.15 |
| 50 | 99 | 14.6 | ||||
| 51 | 99 | 26.5 | ||||
| 52 | 100 | 13.1 | ||||
| 53 | 99 | 23.3 | ||||
| 54 | 98 | 17.8 |
aconventional assays (no FPG added)
bmean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
cEMS, ethyl methanesulfonate
Comet assaysa in the lung of female Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 25 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 0.5 | 0.9 ± 0.30 |
| 26 | 100 | 1.1 | ||||
| 27 | 100 | 1.2 | ||||
| 28 | 100 | 0.6 | ||||
| 29 | 100 | 1.3 | ||||
| 30 | 97 | 1.0 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 31 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 2 ± 1 | 1.3 | 1.2 ± 0.34 |
| 32 | 99 | 0.7 | ||||
| 33 | 98 | 1.2 | ||||
| 34 | 99 | 1.5 | ||||
| 35 | 98 | 1.6 | ||||
| 36 | 98 | 1.2 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 37 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 2 ± 2 | 0.4 | 0,. ± 0.24 |
| 38 | 97 | 0.9 | ||||
| 39 | 99 | 0.9 | ||||
| 40 | 97 | 0.9 | ||||
| 41 | 99 | 0.5 | ||||
| 42 | 100 | 0.6 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 43 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 2 ± 3 | 0.7 | 1.0 ± 0.32 |
| 44 | 98 | 0.9 | ||||
| 45 | 99 | 0.7 | ||||
| 46 | 96 | 1.2 | ||||
| 47 | 98 | 1.0 | ||||
| 48 | 98 | 1.6 | ||||
EMSc (Positivecontrol) | 55 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 9 ± 5 | 13.2 | 16.7 ± 2.83 |
| 56 | 99 | 13.0 | ||||
| 57 | 99 | 18.7 | ||||
| 58 | 97 | 18.8 | ||||
| 59 | 100 | 18.7 | ||||
| 60 | 98 | 17.8 |
aconventional assays (no FPG added)
bmean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
cEMS, ethyl methanesulfonate
Fig. 3Rat liver cells in Comet assay. a, c vehicle control, b, d after treatment of the animals with the positive control substance, ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS). a, b Comet assay in absence of formyl pyrimidine glycosylase (FPG). c, d Comet assay in presence of FPG
Comet assays in presence of FPGa in the liver of male Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 1 | 97 | 98 ± 1 | 1 ± 1 | 9.8 | 6.2 ± 2.29 |
| 2 | 99 | 6.0 | ||||
| 3 | 99 | 5.4 | ||||
| 4 | 99 | 5.4 | ||||
| 5 | 98 | 7.7 | ||||
| 6 | 98 | 3.1 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 7 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 1 ± 1 | 5.7 | 5.3 ± 1.09 |
| 8 | 97 | 4.3 | ||||
| 9 | 99 | 5.8 | ||||
| 10 | 99 | 5.2 | ||||
| 11 | 97 | 4.0 | ||||
| 12 | 100 | 7.0 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 13 | 99 | 98 ± 2 | 2 ± 1 | 8.3 | 6.1 ± 1.67 |
| 14 | 99 | 7.5 | ||||
| 15 | 98 | 3.7 | ||||
| 16 | 99 | 4.9 | ||||
| 17 | 93 | 6.5 | ||||
| 18 | 99 | 5.8 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 19 | 100 | 99 ± 1 | 2 ± 1 | 6.8 | 5.0 ± 1.09 |
| 20 | 100 | 4.4 | ||||
| 21 | 98 | 5.0 | ||||
| 22 | 97 | 4.7 | ||||
| 23 | 99 | 3.6 | ||||
| 24 | 100 | 5.6 |
aFPG, formamido pyrimidine DNA glycosylase
bmean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
Comet assays in presence of FPGa in the liver of female Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 25 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 5 ± 3 | 7.4 | 7.5 ± 1.13 |
| 26 | 100 | 7.8 | ||||
| 27 | 100 | 7.2 | ||||
| 28 | 100 | 8.3 | ||||
| 29 | 100 | 8.7 | ||||
| 30 | 97 | 5.5 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 31 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 4 ± 2 | 7.1 | 7.6 ± 1 + .47 |
| 32 | 99 | 6.5 | ||||
| 33 | 99 | 8.4 | ||||
| 34 | 99 | 9.0 | ||||
| 35 | 98 | 9.3 | ||||
| 36 | 98 | 5.6 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 37 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 5.5 | 7.9 ± 2.74 |
| 38 | 97 | 10.7 | ||||
| 39 | 99 | 5.6 | ||||
| 40 | 97 | 5.3 | ||||
| 41 | 99 | 9.4 | ||||
| 42 | 100 | 11.0 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 43 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 4 ± 2 | 9.2 | 7.0 ± 1.97 |
| 44 | 98 | 5.2 | ||||
| 45 | 99 | 8.3 | ||||
| 46 | 95 | 6.3 | ||||
| 47 | 98 | 8.6 | ||||
| 48 | 98 | 4.4 |
aFPG, formamido pyrimidine DNA glycosylase
bmean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
Comet assays in presence of FPGa in the lung of male Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 1 | 97 | 98 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 9.6 | 9.4 ± 2.04 |
| 2 | 99 | 12.1 | ||||
| 3 | 99 | 8.5 | ||||
| 4 | 99 | 8.5 | ||||
| 5 | 98 | 11.2 | ||||
| 6 | 98 | 6.4 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 7 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 2 ± 2 | 6.5 | 6.4 ± 0.69 |
| 8 | 97 | 6.1 | ||||
| 9 | 99 | 7.5 | ||||
| 10 | 99 | 6.1 | ||||
| 11 | 97 | 6.6 | ||||
| 12 | 100 | 5.5 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 13 | 99 | 98 ± 2 | 4 ± 4 | 12.0 | 7.9 ± 3.21 |
| 14 | 99 | 3.6 | ||||
| 15 | 98 | 6.0 | ||||
| 16 | 99 | 7.3 | ||||
| 17 | 93 | 7.2 | ||||
| 18 | 99 | 11.4 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 19 | 100 | 99 ± 1 | 1 ± 1 | 3.8 | 3.9 ± 0.72 |
| 20 | 100 | 3.5 | ||||
| 21 | 98 | 5.2 | ||||
| 22 | 97 | 3.6 | ||||
| 23 | 99 | 3.3 | ||||
| 24 | 100 | 4.2 |
aFPG, formamido pyrimidine DNA glycosylase
bmean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
Comet assays in presence of FPGa in the lung of female Wistar rats
| NVP dose | Ani-mal (number) | Indi-vidual viability (%) | Viability (%) | TI (%)b | TI (%) (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ppm | 25 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 8.8 | 8.7 ± 1 + .81 |
| 26 | 100 | 10.7 | ||||
| 27 | 100 | 7.9 | ||||
| 28 | 100 | 8.0 | ||||
| 29 | 100 | 10.6 | ||||
| 30 | 97 | 5.9 | ||||
| 5 ppm | 31 | 99 | 99 ± 1 | 3 ± 2 | 7.3 | 7.8 ± 1.30 |
| 32 | 99 | 8.6 | ||||
| 33 | 99 | 7.0 | ||||
| 34 | 99 | 6.8 | ||||
| 35 | 98 | 10.1 | ||||
| 36 | 98 | 7.1 | ||||
| 10 ppm | 37 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 1 ± 1 | 8.7 | 7.2 ± 1.81 |
| 38 | 97 | 8.1 | ||||
| 39 | 99 | 7.9 | ||||
| 40 | 97 | 8.4 | ||||
| 41 | 99 | 6.0 | ||||
| 42 | 100 | 4.0 | ||||
| 20 ppm | 43 | 98 | 98 ± 1 | 3 ± 1 | 6.2 | 7.4 ± 2.90 |
| 44 | 98 | 8.6 | ||||
| 45 | 99 | 10.2 | ||||
| 46 | 95 | 2.3 | ||||
| 47 | 98 | 7.7 | ||||
| 48 | 98 | 9.7 |
aFPG, formamido pyrimidine DNA glycosylase
bMean of medians from 2 slides, each carrying 50 evaluated cells
LOD, LOQ and recovery of the GSH and GSSG test procedures used
| Test system | LOD (nM) | LOQ (nM) | Cdeterminedt | Recovery (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glutathione recycling assay | tGSH | 49 ( | 98 | 640 | 659–680 ( | 103–106 ( |
| 200 | 181–216 ( | 90–108 ( | ||||
| GSSG | 72 ( | 144 | 20 | 18,9–24,1 ( | 94–120 ( | |
| NPSH | GSH | 1041 ( | 2082 | 480 | 470,0 ± 28,3 ( | 91–102 ( |
LOD, limit of detection; LOQ, limit of quantification; GSH, glutathione (reduced); GSSG, oxidized glutathione; tGSH, total glutathione (sum of GSH + GSSG); NPSH, non-protein sulfhydryl; C, concentration
Glutathione levels after treatment of the rats with NVPa
| NVP dose | Animal (number) | tGSHb | GSSGb | GSHb,c | NPSHb | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Individual animal | Group | Individual animal | Group | Individual animal | Group | Individual animal | Group | ||||
| 0 ppm | 1 | 4.80 | 4.69 ± 0.71 | 145 | 137 ± 21 | 4.51 | 4.42 ± 0.70 | 4,82 | 4.52 ± 0.55 | ||
| 2 | 5.32 | 154 | 5.01 | 5,02 | |||||||
| 3 | 4.47 | 163 | 4.15 | 4,11 | |||||||
| 4 | 3.54 | 108 | 3.32 | 3,76 | |||||||
| 5 | 5.54 | 125 | 5.29 | 5,10 | |||||||
| 6 | 4.50 | 127 | 4.25 | 4,30 | |||||||
| 5 ppm | 7 | 4.10 | 4.72 ± 0.67 | 133 | 116 ± 32 | 3.84 | 4.49 ± 0.68 | 3,86 | 4.42 ± 0.52 | ||
| 8 | 5.63 | 71 | 5.48 | 5,13 | |||||||
| 9 | 4.92 | 144 | 4.63 | 4,59 | |||||||
| 10 | 4.16 | 114 | 3.93 | 4,10 | |||||||
| 11 | 5.33 | 149 | 5.04 | 4,86 | |||||||
| 12 | 4.17 | 87 | 4.00 | 3,99 | |||||||
| 10 ppm | 13 | 3.70 | 4.46 ± 0.62 | 132 | 135 ± 12 | 3.44 | 4.19 ± 0.61 | 3,39 | 4.23 ± 0.58 | ||
| 14 | 4.21 | 132 | 3.95 | 4.11 | |||||||
| 15 | 4.94 | 120 | 4.70 | 4.72 | |||||||
| 16 | 5.28 | 151 | 4.98 | 4.83 | |||||||
| 17 | 4.70 | 147 | 4.41 | 4.57 | |||||||
| 18 | 3.91 | 126 | 3.65 | 3.76 | |||||||
| 20 ppm | 19 | 4.75 | 4.20 ± 0.65 | 151 | 136 ± 22 | 4.45 | 4.04 ± 0.62 | 4.47 | 4.44 ± 0.55 | ||
| 10 | 4.83 | 130 | 4.57 | 5.23 | |||||||
| 21 | 3.27 | 106 | 3.06 | 3.72 | |||||||
| 22 | 3.77 | 142 | 3.48 | 3.88 | |||||||
| 23 | 4.55 | 121 | 4.31 | 4.67 | |||||||
| 24 | 4.68 | 167 | 4.35 | 4.64 | |||||||
aMean ± standard deviation
btGSH, total glutathione; GSSG, oxidized glutathione; GSH, reduced glutathione; NPSH, non-protein sulfhydryl
cGSH recycling assay
LOD and LOQ of the AROD assays in the tissues used
| Assay | Organ | LOD (pmol/min/mg protein) | LOQ (pmol/min/mg Pprotein) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EROD | Liver | 1,0 | 2,0 |
| Lung | 1,6 | 3,1 | |
| PROD | Liver | 3,1 | 6,2 |
| Lung | 9,6 | 19,1 | |
| BROD | Liver | 0,5 | 1,1 |
| Lung | 1,8 | 3,6 |
LOD, limit of detection; LOQ, limit of quantification; AROD, alkyloxyresorufin dealkylase; EROD, 7-ethoxyresorufin deethylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase
AROD activities of the present vehicle controls and historical controls of rat liver microsomes
| Group | Substrate | Activity (pmol/min/mg protein) |
|---|---|---|
| Vehicle control of the present NVP inhalation study ( | EROD | 19 ± 6 |
| PROD | 13 ± 4 | |
| BROD | 48 ± 18 | |
| Historical controls ( | EROD | 22–41 |
| PROD | 18–29 | |
| BROD | 63–141 | |
| Aroclor 1254-induced control (storage < 1 month) | EROD | 1070 ± 72 |
| PROD | 195 ± 6 | |
| BROD | 892 ± 36 | |
| Aroclor 1254- induced control (storage approximately 18 months) | EROD | 1155 ± 91 |
| PROD | 126 ± 8 | |
| BROD | 772 ± 51 |
AROD, alkyloxyresorufin dealkylase; EROD, 7-ethoxyresorufin deethylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase
Fig. 4AROD activities after treatment of the rats with various doses of NVP (mean ± SD; n = 6). Activities are shown in the sequence EROD liver, PROD liver, PROD lung, BROD liver, BROD lung, + below LOD. AROD, alkyloxyresorufin dealkylase; EROD, 7-ethoxyresorufin deethylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase; BROD, 7-benzyloxyresorufin debenzylase
Lack of EROD, PROD or BROD inhibition by NVP in Aroclor 1254-induced rat liver microsomes
| Substrate | Enzyme activity (pmol/min/mg protein) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LOQ ( | NVP concentration (µM) | ||||
| 0 | 1 | 10 | 100 | ||
| EROD | 1.70 | 821.5 ± 54.9 | 859.9 ± 14.1 | 827.9 ± 13.6 | 858.9 ± 33.9 |
| PROD | 4.84 | 78.9 ± 3.2 | 88.6 ± 3.3 | 92.1 ± 6.0 | 94.6 ± 2.3 |
| BROD | 6.46 | 445.1 ± 9.1 | 470.1 ± 29.7 | 445.1 ± 20.9 | 456.5 ± 30.9 |
AROD, alkyloxyresorufin dealkylase; EROD, 7-ethoxyresorufin deethylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase; PROD, 7-pentoxyresorufin depentylase; NVP, N-vinyl pyrrolidone; LOQ, limit of quantification
Lauric acid hydroxylationa
| NVP dose | Animal (num-ber) | ω-hydroxylase (CYP4A-activity) | ω-1-hydroxylase (CYP2E1-activity) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peak surface | Enzyme activity individual | Enzyme activity group | Peak surface | Enzyme activity individual | Enzyme activity group | ||
| 0 ppm | 1 | 16,449 | 10,966 | 10,983 ± 2236 | 6737 | 4491 | 4512 ± 1050 |
| 2 | 10,791 | 7194 | 4325 | 2883 | |||
| 3 | 17,564 | 11,709 | 6828 | 4552 | |||
| 4 | 15,737 | 10,491 | 6957 | 4638 | |||
| 5 | 21,137 | 14,091 | 9280 | 6187 | |||
| 6 | 17,170 | 11,447 | 6482 | 4321 | |||
| 20 ppm | 19 | 27,314 | 20,495 | 14,727 ± 5456 | 9940 | 7458 | 5149 ± 2010 |
| 20 | 28,341 | 20,593 | 10,040 | 7295 | |||
| 21 | 15,814 | 10,543 | 5283 | 3522 | |||
| 22 | 21,818 | 14,545 | 7513 | 5008 | |||
| 23 | 23,109 | 15,406 | 7824 | 5216 | |||
| 24 | 11,088 | 6779 | 3996 | 2393 | |||
Mean ± standard deviation; enzyme activity represented as peak surface/min/mg protein resulting from 0.075 mg submitted to HPLC analysis
Fig. 5Gene array analysis of cultivated rat hepatocytes after incubation with the indicated concentrations of NVP for 24h. a Principle component analysis. PCA: principle component analysis; the percentages in brackets indicate the explained variance of the respective principle component. The three symbols per color indicate the results of three independent incubations. b Heatmap visualization of differential alterations of gene expression by NVP. The heatmap is based on the genes with the lowest adjusted p values according to the Limma t test. The colours of the heatmap indicate the relative gene regulation level above (red) or below (blue) the average for each row (color figure online)