Cell Biology and Toxicology

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 359–365 | Cite as

New approaches to estimating the mutagenic potential of chemicals

  • D. Marzin
Article

Abstract

New developments in mutagenic risk assessment have appeared in the past few years. New methods have been developed such asin vitro micronucleus assay for chromosomal alterations, comet assay for primary DNA damage, use of transgenic animals to detectin vivo gene mutations, and fluorescent in situ hybridization method to detect aneuploidy. Other new methods will be developed in the few next years, including the use of DNA chips and the use of molecular biological methods. Several micromethods have been developed to test a great number of chemical compounds. New concepts have appeared concerning interpretation of data, and particularly of thresholds especially in the case of aneugens; in some cases metabolic or mechanistic thresholds were demonstrated. Genotoxic studies are best integrated into toxicological testing: for example, some genotoxicity tests can be integrated into subacute toxicology; interpretation of data includes metabolism; and toxicokinetic data relate to other toxicological studies. Conversely, genotoxicity data can be used to interpret toxicology studies.

mutagenicity genotoxicity threshold micromethods comet assay transgenic animals 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aarderma MJ, Albertini S, Arni P et al. Aneuploidy: a report of an ECETOC task force. Mutat Res. 1998;410:3–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson D, Yu TW, McGregor DB. Comet assay responses as indicators of carcinogen exposure. Mutagenesis. 1998;13: 539–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashby J, Kier L, Wilson AG et al. Evaluation of the potential carcinogenicity and genetic toxicity to humans of the herbicide acetochlor. Hum Exp Toxicol. 1996;15:702–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergman K, Muller L, Teigen SW. Current issues in mutagenesis and carcinogenesis, no. 65. The genotoxicity and carcinogenicity of paracetamol: a regulatory (re)view. Mutat Res. 1996;349:263–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brooks TM. The use of a streamlined bacterial mutagenicity assay, the MINISCREEN. Mutagenesis. 1995;10:447–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Burke DA, Wedd DJ, Burlinson B. Use of the Miniscreen assay to screen novel compounds for bacterial mutagenicity in the pharmaceutical industry. Mutagenesis. 1996;11:201–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Elhajouji A, Tibaldi F, Kirsh-Volders M. Indication for thresholds of chromosome non-disjunction versus chromosome lagging induced by spindle inhibitors in vitro in human lymphocytes. Mutagenesis. 1997;12:133–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Elhajouji A, Cunha M, Kirsh-Volders M. Spindle poisons can induce polyploidy by mitotic slippage and micronucleate mononucleates in the cytokinesis-block assay. Mutagenesis. 1998;13:193–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fairbain DW, Olive PL and O'Neill KL. The comet assay: a comprehensive review. Mutat Res. 1995;339:37–59.Google Scholar
  10. Galloway SM, Miller JE, Armstrong MJ, Bean CL, Skopek TR, Nichols WW. DNA synthesis inhibition as an indirect mechanism of chromosome aberrations: comparison of DNA-reactive and non-DNA-reactive clastogens. Mutat Res. 1998;400:169–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gee P, Maron DM, Ames BN. Detection and classification of mutagens: a set of base-specific Salmonella tester strains. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1994;22:11606–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grawe J, Adler ID, Nusse M. Quantitative and qualitative studies of micronucleus in mouse erythrocytes using flow cytometry. II. Analysis of micronuclei of aneugenic and clastogenic origin by dual-colour FISH on populations of bone marrow PCEs flow sorted on the basis of their relative DNA content. Mutagenesis. 1997;12:9–1.6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Grawe J, Abramsson-Zetterberg L, Zetterberg G. Low dose effects of chemicals as assessed by the flow cytometric in vivo micronucleus assay. Mutat Res. 1998;405:199–208.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gunther WC, Newton RK, Mauthe RJ, Guzzie PJ. Evaluation of a transgenic cell line as an alternative in vitro test for mammalian cell mutagens. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1999;33(supplement 30, EMS Abstracts 73):28.Google Scholar
  15. Hacia JG. Resequencing and mutational analysis using oligonucleotide microarrays. Nature Genetics. 1999;21(supplement):42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jenkins GJS, Takahashi N, Parry JM. Inverse restriction site mutation (iRSM) analysis. Mutation detection involving the formation of restriction enzyme sites in target genes. Mutagenesis. 1999;14:37–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mayo JK, Smith AL, Mattes WB, Aaron CS. Evaluation of a mini-Ames assay for pharmaceutical compound screening: use of 96-well microtiter plates for treatment. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1999;33(supplement 30, EMS Abstracts 134):43.Google Scholar
  18. Müller L, Kikuchi Y, Probst G et al. ICH-harmonised guidances on genotoxicity testing of pharmaceuticals: evolution, reasoning and impact. Mutat Res. 1999;436:195–225.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nesslany F, Marzin D. A micromethod for the in vitro micronucleus assay. Mutagenesis. 1999;14:403–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Quillardet P, Hofnung M. The SOS chromotest: a review. Mutat Res. 1993;297:235–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Salles B, Provot C, Calson P, Hennevelle I, Gosset I, Fournie GJ. A chemiluminescent microplate assay to detect DNA damage induced by genotoxic treatments. Anal Biochem. 1995;232:37–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schmezer P. The Comet assay special issue. Mutat Res. 1997;375:93–220.Google Scholar
  23. van der Lelie D, Regniers L, Borremans B, Provoost A, Verschaeve L. The VITOTOX test, an SOS bioluminescence Salmonella typhimurium test to measure genotoxicity kinetics. Mutat Res. 1997;389:279–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Van Gompel JAJ, Thilemans L, Geerts K, Vanparys P. Evaluation of the added value of the single cell gel electrophoresis test to the standard battery of genetic toxicology tests. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1999;33(supplement 30, EMS Abstracts 223):65.Google Scholar
  25. White PA, Rasmussen JB, Blaise C. A semi-automated, microplate version of the SOS chromotest for the analysis of complex environmental extracts. Mutat Res. 1996;360:51–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Marzin
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of ToxicologyInstitut Pasteur of LilleLille CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations