Literature DB >> 9587424

Aneuploidy: a report of an ECETOC task force.

M J Aardema1, S Albertini, P Arni, L M Henderson, M Kirsch-Volders, J M Mackay, A M Sarrif, D A Stringer, R D Taalman.   

Abstract

Aneuploidy plays a significant role in adverse human health conditions including birth defects, pregnancy wastage and cancer. Although there is clear evidence of chemically induced aneuploidy in experimental systems, to date there are insufficient data to determine with certainty if chemically induced aneuploidy contributes to human disease. However, since there is no reason to assume that chemically induced aneuploidy will not occur in human beings, it is prudent to address the aneugenic potential of chemicals in the safety assessment process. A wide range of methods has been described for the detection of chemically induced aneuploidy including subcellular systems, tests with fungi, plants and Drosophila as well as in vitro mammalian systems and in vivo mammalian somatic and germ cell assays. However, none of these methods is sufficiently validated or widely used in routine screening. Underlying the efforts to develop aneuploidy-specific assays is the presumption that current genetic toxicology tests do not detected chemicals that have aneuploidy-inducing potential. To address this, we have critically evaluated data from standard genetic toxicology assays for 16 known or suspected aneugens. The conclusions from the review are listed below. 1. At present there are only nine chemicals that can be classified as definitive aneugens, as determined by positive results in in vivo rodent assays. 2. As expected, the majority of definitive and suspected aneugens are negative in the bacterial mutation assay. 3. The majority of definitive aneugens evaluated induce polyploidy in vitro. With few exception, they also induced structural chromosome aberrations in vitro. 4. All of the definitive aneugens that have been sufficiently tested induce micronuclei in rodent bone marrow cells in vivo. A number of these chemicals also induced structural chromosome aberrations in vivo. 5. There is no evidence for a unique germ cell aneugen, that is a chemical that induces aneuploidy in germ cells and not in somatic cells. Furthermore, an analysis of several databases indicates the proportion of chemicals which induce polyploidy and not chromosome aberrations in vitro is low. Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made: for screening purposes, a standard genotoxicity test battery (including an in vitro cytogenetic assay with an assessment of polyploidy and clastogenicity at the same harvest time) should be performed; in the absence of polyploidy induction in vitro no further evaluation of aneuploidy-inducing potential is needed; if polyploidy is observed, in vitro follow-up testing to investigate further the aneuploidy-inducing potential should be conducted; such follow-up testing will generally start with the conduct of a standard in vivo somatic cell micronucleus assay; if the in vivo somatic cell micronucleus assay is negative, with adequate evidence of exposure of the bone marrow to the test compound, no further testing of aneuploidy-inducing potential is needed; if the in vivo somatic cell micronucleus assay is positive, further information on mechanisms of micronucleus induction can be obtained by using kinetochore/centromeric staining in vitro and/or in vivo; an assessment of potential germ cell aneuploidy activity may then be considered; aneuploidy induction which does not involve the direct interaction of a chemical or its metabolite(s) with DNA is expected to have a threshold. This must be considered in the risk assessment of such chemicals; this is not addressed by current risk assessment guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9587424     DOI: 10.1016/s1383-5742(97)00029-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutat Res        ISSN: 0027-5107            Impact factor:   2.433


  14 in total

1.  Genotoxicity of carbon nanofibers: are they potentially more or less dangerous than carbon nanotubes or asbestos?

Authors:  E R Kisin; A R Murray; L Sargent; D Lowry; M Chirila; K J Siegrist; D Schwegler-Berry; S Leonard; V Castranova; B Fadeel; V E Kagan; A A Shvedova
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 4.219

2.  How aneuploidy affects metabolic control and causes cancer.

Authors:  D Rasnick; P H Duesberg
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1999-06-15       Impact factor: 3.857

3.  Miniaturized flow cytometric in vitro micronucleus assay represents an efficient tool for comprehensively characterizing genotoxicity dose-response relationships.

Authors:  Steven M Bryce; Svetlana L Avlasevich; Jeffrey C Bemis; Souk Phonethepswath; Stephen D Dertinger
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2010-09-06       Impact factor: 2.433

4.  Further evidence against a direct genotoxic mode of action for arsenic-induced cancer.

Authors:  Catherine B Klein; Joanna Leszczynska; Christina Hickey; Toby G Rossman
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2007-01-08       Impact factor: 4.219

5.  Single-walled carbon nanotube-induced mitotic disruption.

Authors:  L M Sargent; A F Hubbs; S-H Young; M L Kashon; C Z Dinu; J L Salisbury; S A Benkovic; D T Lowry; A R Murray; E R Kisin; K J Siegrist; L Battelli; J Mastovich; J L Sturgeon; K L Bunker; A A Shvedova; S H Reynolds
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 2.433

6.  Dynamically monitoring cellular γ-H2AX reveals the potential of carcinogenicity evaluation for genotoxic compounds.

Authors:  Minmin Qu; Hua Xu; Wuju Li; Jia Chen; Yajiao Zhang; Bin Xu; Zhi Li; Tao Liu; Lei Guo; Jianwei Xie
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-12       Impact factor: 5.153

7.  Suppression of p53 and p21CIP1/WAF1 reduces arsenite-induced aneuploidy.

Authors:  Ana María Salazar; Heather L Miller; Samuel C McNeely; Monserrat Sordo; Patricia Ostrosky-Wegman; J Christopher States
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2010-02-15       Impact factor: 3.739

Review 8.  Road to the crossroads of life and death: linking sister chromatid cohesion and separation to aneuploidy, apoptosis and cancer.

Authors:  Anil K Panigrahi; Debananda Pati
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 6.312

9.  Evaluation of a 4-day repeated-dose micronucleus test in rat glandular stomach and colon using aneugens and non-genotoxic non-carcinogens.

Authors:  Emiko Okada; Yohei Fujiishi; Kazunori Narumi; Wakako Ohyama
Journal:  Genes Environ       Date:  2022-04-11

10.  The need to decide if all estrogens are intrinsically similar.

Authors:  Jonathan G Moggs; John Ashby; Helen Tinwell; Fei Ling Lim; David J Moore; Ian Kimber; George Orphanides
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.