Development of genotoxicity test procedures with Episkin, a reconstructed human skin model: towards new tools for in vitro risk assessment of dermally applied compounds?

Today reconstructed skin models that simulate human skin, such as Episkin, are widely used for safety or efficacy pre-screening. Moreover, they are of growing interest for regulatory purposes in the framework of alternatives to animal testing. In order to reduce and eventually replace results of in vivo genotoxicity testing with in vitro data, there is a need to develop new complementary biological models and methods with improved ability to predict genotoxic risk. This can be achieved if these new assays do take into account exposure conditions that are more relevant than in the current test systems. In an attempt to meet this challenge, two new applications using a human reconstructed skin model for in vitro genotoxicity assessment are proposed. The skin is the target organ for dermally exposed compounds or environmental stress. Although attempts have been made to develop genotoxicity test procedures in vivo on mouse skin, human reconstructed skin models have not been used for in vitro genotoxicity testing so far, although they present clear advantages over mouse skin for human risk prediction. This paper presents the results of the development of a specific protocol allowing to perform the comet assay, a genotoxicity test procedure, on reconstructed skin. The comet assay was conducted after treatment of Episkin with UV, Lomefloxacin and UV or 4-nitroquinoline-N-oxide (4NQO). Treatment with the sunscreen Mexoryl was able to reduce the extent of comet signal. A second approach to use reconstructed epidermis in genotoxicity assays is also proposed. Indeed, the skin is a biologically active barrier driving the response to exposure to chemical agents and their possible metabolites. A specific co-culture system (Figure 1) using Episkin to perform the regular micronucleus assay is presented. Micronucleus induction in L5178Y cells cultured underneath Episkin was assessed after treatment of the reconstructed epidermis with mitomycin C, cyclophosphamide or apigenin. This second way of using human reconstructed skin for genotoxicity testing aims at improving the relevance of exposure conditions in in vitro genotoxicity assays for dermally applied compounds.     

Identification of a Kinase Profile that Predicts Chromosome Damage Induced by Small Molecule Kinase Inhibitors

Kinases are heavily pursued pharmaceutical targets because of their mechanistic role in many diseases. Small molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) are a compound class that includes marketed drugs and compounds in various stages of drug development. While effective, many SMKIs have been associated with toxicity including chromosomal damage. Screening for kinase-mediated toxicity as early as possible is crucial, as is a better understanding of how off-target kinase inhibition may give rise to chromosomal damage. To that end, we employed a competitive binding assay and an analytical method to predict the toxicity of SMKIs. Specifically, we developed a model based on the binding affinity of SMKIs to a panel of kinases to predict whether a compound tests positive for chromosome damage. As training data, we used the binding affinity of 113 SMKIs against a representative subset of all kinases (290 kinases), yielding a 113×290 data matrix. Additionally, these 113 SMKIs were tested for genotoxicity in an in vitro micronucleus test (MNT). Among a variety of models from our analytical toolbox, we selected using cross-validation a combination of feature selection and pattern recognition techniques: Kolmogorov-Smirnov/T-test hybrid as a univariate filter, followed by Random Forests for feature selection and Support Vector Machines (SVM) for pattern recognition. Feature selection identified 21 kinases predictive of MNT. Using the corresponding binding affinities, the SVM could accurately predict MNT results with 85% accuracy (68% sensitivity, 91% specificity). This indicates that kinase inhibition profiles are predictive of SMKI genotoxicity. While in vitro testing is required for regulatory review, our analysis identified a fast and cost-efficient method for screening out compounds earlier in drug development. Equally important, by identifying a panel of kinases predictive of genotoxicity, we provide medicinal chemists a set of kinases to avoid when designing compounds, thereby providing a basis for rational drug design away from genotoxicity.     

Thirty compounds tested in the Drosophila wing spot test

The Drosophila wing somatic mutation and recombination test (SMART) was evaluated for its suitability in genotoxicity screening by testing 30 chemicals. Of the 2 crosses used, the mwh-flr3 cross turned out to be more convenient than the previously used mwh-flr cross. Based on the experience gained with both acute exposures and chronic exposures of different duration, we suggest that the optimal strategy in genotoxicity screening is to start with chronic exposure of 3-day-old larvae for 48 h (that is, until pupation). Only for unstable compounds and very volatile compounds and gases are acute treatments, including inhalation, recommended. In general, a qualitative evaluation of the genotoxicity of a compound in the wing assay is possible with as few as 1-2 different exposure concentrations. A more quantitative evaluation of genotoxicity, based upon dose-response data, can often be achieved with as few as 3-4 concentrations. The results reported here were obtained in 2 different laboratories, demonstrating that the wing spot test is easily transferable to other laboratories. The experience gained indicates that the assay has now been developed to an extent that a coordinated international comparative validation study is desirable.     

New approaches to estimating the mutagenic potential of chemicals

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. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Comparative study with the alkaline Comet assay and the chromosome aberration test

The alkaline Comet assay is becoming a useful tool for early genotoxicity testing of new pharmaceutical drug candidates. The aim of this study was to elucidate the predictive value of Comet assay results for the outcome of the chromosome aberration (CA) test. For this purpose, a validation exercise with 13 drug candidates was carried out utilizing V79 Chinese hamster cells and human lymphocytes. The study demonstrates that results of the Comet assay and the chromosome aberration test show a high degree of agreement, irrespective of the cell type used. In the Comet assay, seven compounds were positive and six were negative, while in the CA test, six were positive and seven were negative. The only discrepancy was found with one compound that was positive in the Comet assay with V79 cells, negative in the Comet assay with human lymphocytes and clearly negative in the CA test with human lymphocytes. For the selection of concentrations for testing in the Comet assay, cytotoxicity by means of cell count after incubation or viability by means of Trypan-blue dye exclusion (TBDE) were used. The results show that either parameter led to analysis of a concentration range in the Comet assay similar to that chosen in the CA test, in which cell count (when using V79 cells) or mitotic index (in case of lymphocytes) were used. However, since cell count after incubation of cells is much more labour-intensive, viability was preferred as the parameter to assess cytotoxicity and for selecting concentrations for analysis in the Comet assay. The data presented in this study may contribute the regulatory acceptance of the Comet assay, e.g. for mechanistic studies.     

Genotoxicity testing of six insecticides in two crosses of the Drosophila wing spot test

Among the great variety of genotoxicity assays available, the wing spot test in Drosophila melanogaster has some characteristics that make it very suited for the screening of genotoxic activity, i.e., it is an easy and inexpensive assay using a eukaryotic organism in vivo. One of the most interesting characteristics of the assay is its capacity to detect genotoxic activity of promutagens without the necessity of an exogenous metabolic activation system. In this paper we present results obtained with a recently developed high bioactivation cross of the wing spot test (NORR cross). The positive results obtained with the five well-known procarcinogens 7, 12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene, N-nitrosopyrrolidine, p-dimethylaminoazobenzene, diethylnitrosamine and urethane clearly show that the NORR strains are similar to the other high bioactivation strains previously described, but they lack their methodological disadvantages. We have tested six insecticides, which are characterised by having contradictory results in other genotoxicity tests, using both the standard and the high bioactivation (NORR) cross. The six insecticides analysed are the pyrethroid allethrin, the methylenedioxyphenolic compound piperonyl butoxide, the chlorinated hydrocarbons dieldrin and endrin, and the organophosphates dimethoate and malathion. We obtained negative results for all six compounds. Our results show the suitability of the wing spot test for the evaluation of compounds at the first level of genotoxicity testing.     

Enhanced prediction of potential rodent carcinogenicity by utilizing comet assay and apoptotic assay in combination

The comet assay has been recently validated as a sensitive and specific test system for the quantification of DNA damage. The objectives of this study are to investigate the utility of comet assay for detecting mutagens with 11 substances that demonstrated positive results in at least one test among four standard short-term genotoxicity tests, and to evaluate its ability to predict rodent carcinogenicity. Out of 11 test substances, positive comet results were obtained for colchicine, hydroxyurea and actinomycin D. No effect on DNA migration, determined as the tail moment, was found with theophylline or 2,4-dinitrophenol. Bisphenol A, vinblastine, paclitaxel and p-anisidine appeared cytotoxic clastogens because these induced tail moment at concentrations showing 60% or less cell survival. In addition, among three test substances showing the bimodal distribution of DNA damage, which is a characteristic of apoptosis, true apoptosis result was obtained for camptothecin and dexamethasone with the Annexin V affinity assay. With this limited data-set, an investigation into the predictive value of these short-term genotoxicity tests for determining the carcinogenicity showed that comet assay has relatively high sensitivity and superior specificity to other four short-term genotoxicity assay. Therefore, our data suggest that comet assay, especially in combination with apoptotic assay, would be a good predictive test to minimize false-positives in evaluation of the potential rodent carcinogenicity.     

Genotoxicity investigations on nanomaterials: Methods,preparation and characterization of test material,potential artifacts and limitations—Many questions,some answers

Nanomaterials display novel properties to which most toxicologists have not consciously been exposed before the advent of their practical use. The same properties, small size and particular shape, large surface area and surface activity, which make nanomaterials attractive in many applications, may contribute to their toxicological profile. This review describes what is known about genotoxicity investigations on nanomaterials published in the openly available scientific literature to-date. The most frequently used test was the Comet assay: 19 studies, 14 with positive outcome. The second most frequently used test was the micronucleus test: 14 studies, 12 of them with positive outcome. The Ames test, popular with other materials, was less frequently used (6 studies) and was almost always negative, the bacterial cell wall possibly being a barrier for many nanomaterials. Recommendations for improvements emerging from analyzing the reports summarized in this review are: Know what nanomaterial has been tested (and in what form); Consider uptake and distribution of the nanomaterial; Use standardized methods; Recognize that nanomaterials are not all the same; Use in vivo studies to correlate in vitro results; Take nanomaterials specific properties into account; Learn about the mechanism of nanomaterials genotoxic effects. It is concluded that experiences with other, non-nano, substances (molecules and larger particles) taught us that mechanisms of genotoxic effects can be diverse and their elucidation can be demanding, while there often is an immediate need to assess the genotoxic hazard. Thus a practical, pragmatic approach is the use of a battery of standard genotoxicity testing methods covering a wide range of mechanisms. Application of these standard methods to nanomaterials demands adaptations and the interpretation of results from the genotoxicity tests may need additional considerations. This review should help to improve standard genotoxicity testing as well as investigations on the underlying mechanism and the interpretation of genotoxicity data on nanomaterials.     

GADD45a-GFP GreenScreen HC assay results for the ECVAM recommended lists of genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals for assessment of new genotoxicity tests

A recent ECVAM workshop considered how to reduce falsely predictive positive results when undertaking in vitro genotoxicity testing, and thus to avoid unnecessary follow-up with tests involving animals. As it was anticipated that modified versions of existing assays as well as new assays might contribute to a solution, an expert panel was asked to identify a list of chemicals that could be used in the evaluation of such assays. Three categories of test chemicals were chosen comprising a total of 62 compounds. This paper provides test results for these chemicals using the GreenScreen HC assay. All tests were carried out in triplicate, by multiple operators, with and without S9, using invariant protocols. Group 1 chemicals should be detected as positive in in vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity tests: 18/20 (90%) were reproducibly positive in GreenScreen HC. Group 2 chemicals should give negative results in in vitro genotoxicity tests: 22/23 (96%) were reproducibly negative in GreenScreen HC. Overall concordance for Groups 1 and 2 is 93%. Group 3 chemicals should give negative results in in vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity tests, but have been reported to induce chromosomal aberrations or Tk mutations in mouse lymphoma cells, often at high concentrations or at high levels of cytotoxicity: 13/17 (76%) were reproducibly negative in GreenScreen HC. Of the four positive compounds in Group 3, p-nitrophenol was only positive at the top dose (10 mM), 2,4-DCP is an in vivo genotoxin, and two chemicals are antioxidant compounds that may be acting as pro-oxidants in the hyperoxic conditions of cell culture. Overall, these predictive figures are similar to those from other studies with the GreenScreen HC assay and confirm its high specificity, which in turn minimizes the generation of falsely predictive positive results.     

Evaluation of the GreenScreen GADD45alpha-GFP indicator assay with non-proprietary and proprietary compounds

The GreenScreen GADD45alpha indicator assay has been assessed for its concordance with in vitro genotoxicity and rodent carcinogenicity bioassay data. To test robustness, sensitivity, and specificity of the assay, 91 compounds with known genotoxicity results were screened in a blinded manner. Fifty seven of the compounds were classified as in vitro genotoxic whereas 34 were non-genotoxic. Out of the 91 compounds, 50 had been tested in 2-year carcinogenicity assays, with 33 identified to be rodent carcinogens and 17 non-carcinogens. Gadd45alpha assay sensitivity and specificity for genotoxicity was 30% and 97%, respectively (17/57 and 33/34), whereas its sensitivity and specificity for rodent carcinogenicity was 30% and 88%, respectively (10/33 and 15/17). Gadd45alpha assay genotoxicity results from this validation study exhibited a high concordance with previously published results as well as for compound test results generated at two different sites (91%, 19/21), indicating that the assay is both robust and reproducible. In conclusion, results from this blinded and independent validation study indicate that the GreenScreen GADD45 indicator assay is reproducible and reliable with low sensitivity and high specificity for identifying genotoxic and carcinogenic compounds.     

Bayes optimal informer sets for early-stage drug discovery

An important experimental design problem in early-stage drug discovery is how to prioritize available compounds for testing when very little is known about the target protein. Informer-based ranking (IBR) methods address the prioritization problem when the compounds have provided bioactivity data on other potentially relevant targets. An IBR method selects an informer set of compounds, and then prioritizes the remaining compounds on the basis of new bioactivity experiments performed with the informer set on the target. We formalize the problem as a two-stage decision problem and introduce the Bayes Optimal Informer SEt (BOISE) method for its solution. BOISE leverages a flexible model of the initial bioactivity data, a relevant loss function, and effective computational schemes to resolve the two-step design problem. We evaluate BOISE and compare it to other IBR strategies in two retrospective studies, one on protein-kinase inhibition and the other on anticancer drug sensitivity. In both empirical settings BOISE exhibits better predictive performance than available methods. It also behaves well with missing data, where methods that use matrix completion show worse predictive performance.     

Development of a highthroughput yeast-based assay for detection of metabolically activated genotoxins

The potential genotoxicity of drug candidates is a serious concern during drug development. Therefore, it is important to assess the potential genotoxicity and mutagenicity of a compound early in the discovery phase of drug development. AMES Salmonella assay is the most widely used assay for the assessment of mutagenicity and genotoxicity. However, the AMES assay is not readily adaptable to highthroughput screening and several strains of Salmonella must be employed to ensure that different types of DNA damage can be studied. Therefore, an additional robust highthroughput genotoxicity screen would be of significant value in the early detection and elimination of genotoxicity. The complexity of DNA damage requires numerous cellular pathways, thus using single model organism to predict genotoxicity in early stage is challenging. Another critical component of such screens is that they incorporate the capability of metabolic activation to ensure that no genotoxic metabolites are generated. We have developed a novel highthroughput reporter assay for DNA repair that detects genotoxicity, and which incorporates metabolic activation. The assay has a low compound requirement as compared to Ames, and relies upon two different reporter genes cotransfected into a yeast strain. The gene encoding Renilla luciferase is fused to the constitutive 3-phosphoglycerate kinase (PGK1) promoter and integrated into the yeast genome to provide a control for cell numbers. The firefly luciferase gene is fused to the RAD51 (bacterial RecA homolog) promoter and used to report an increase in DNA repair activity. A dual luciferase assay is performed by measuring the firefly and Renilla luciferase activities in the same sample. The result is expressed as the ratio of the two luciferase activities; changes from the base level (control) are interpreted as induction of the RAD51 promoter and evidence of DNA repair activity in eukaryote cells due to DNA damage. The yeast dual luciferase reporter has been characterized with and without S-9 activation using positive and negative control agents. This assay is efficient, requires little time and low amounts of compound. The assay is compatible with metabolic activation, adaptable to a highthroughput platform, and yields data that accurately and reproducibly detects DNA damage. Whereas the normal yeast cell wall, plasma membrane composition and the presence of active transporters can prevent the entry or persistence of some compounds internally in yeast cells, our assay did show concordance with regulatory mutagenicity assays, many of which require metabolic activation and are poorly detected by bacterial mutagenicity assays. Although there were false negative results, in our hands this assay performs as well as or better than other commercially available genetox assays. Furthermore, the RAD51 gene is strongly inducible by homologous intrachromosomal recombination; thus this assay may provide a means to detect clastogens. The RAD51 promoter fused dual luciferase assay represents a valuable addition to the armamentarium for the early detection of genotoxic compounds.     

The comet assay as an indicator test for germ cell genotoxicity

The in vivo comet assay is a well-established genotoxicity test. It is currently mainly performed with somatic cells from different organs to detect a genotoxic activity of potential carcinogens. It is regarded as a useful test for follow-up testing of positive or equivocal in vitro test results and for the evaluation of local genotoxicity. However, the comet assay also has the potential to detect germ cell genotoxicity and may be used for demonstrating the ability of a substance or its metabolite(s) to directly interact with the genetic material of gonadal and/or germ cells. Such results are important for the classification of germ cell mutagens, e.g. in the context of the "Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals" (GHS). This review summarizes and discusses available information on the use of the comet assay with germ cells and cells from the gonads in genetic toxicology. The literature contains results from in vitro studies, ex vivo studies and in vivo studies. With regard to the assessment of germ cell genotoxicity, only in vivo studies are relevant but the other kind of studies provided important information on various aspects of the methodology. Many comet assay studies with human sperm have been performed in the context of male infertility and assisted fertilization. The results of these studies are not reviewed in detail here but various aspects of the assay modifications used are discussed. Measuring DNA effects by the comet assay in sperm requires additional steps for chromatin decondensation. Many different modifications of the alkaline and the neutral comet assay are in use but a standard protocol has not been established yet. High and variable background levels of DNA effects were reported and there is still need for standardization and validation of the comet assay with sperm. Some human biomonitoring studies with human sperm were published, but it seems to be premature to use these data for hazard identification and classification of chemicals. In contrast, the standard alkaline in vivo comet assay can easily be adapted to investigations with cells from reproductive organs. Tests with cells from the gonads (testis and ovary) seem to be most appropriate and a promising tool for demonstrating that a test compound reaches the gonads and is able to interact with the genetic material of germ cells. However, studies to standardize and validate these methods are necessary before the comet assay can be usefully applied in risk assessment of germ cell mutagens.     

Enhancement of bleomycin-induced micronucleus formation in V79 cells as a rapid and sensitive screen for non-covalent DNA-binding compounds.

Non-covalent drug/DNA interactions are difficult to study and because of this, the significance of such interactions from a safety standpoint and their contribution to positive genetic toxicology test findings is poorly understood. It is shown in the present study that such interactions may be detected and quantified in Chinese hamster V79 cells by an adaptation of the bleomycin amplification assay. This assay measures the ability of a test compound to enhance the DNA damaging activity of the antibiotic bleomycin using micronucleus formation as an endpoint. Results are presented examining the bleomycin amplification activity of known intercalating agents, groove-binding agents and other structurally diverse classes of compounds for which intercalative status has not been reported. The assay reveals a strong and predictable SAR for amplification activity based on number and orientation of aromatic rings. Moreover, excellent correlations are observed between DNA binding (viscometric analyses) and DNA amplification in V79 cells for a series of seven experimental compounds. The assay is shown to be useful in understanding the genotoxicity of marketed antihistamines and to help explain genetic toxicology findings observed in a series of novel pharmaceutical entities. It is proposed that assessment of bleomycin amplification activity of novel compounds in early genotoxicity prescreening may provide important information upon which to base synthesis of compounds with minimal or no genotoxic liability.     

Genotoxicity testing of biotechnology-derived products. Report of a GUM task force. Gesellschaft für Umweltmutationsforschung

Various aspects of genotoxicity testing of biotechnology-derived products are discussed based on information gathered from a questionnaire which was sent to about 30 predominantly European companies. Feedback was received from 13 companies on 78 compounds, mostly recombinant proteins but also on a number of nonrecombinant proteins, which had been assessed for genotoxicity in a total of 177 tests. Four of the 78 compounds appeared to elicit reproducible genotoxic effects. For one of these compounds, the activity could be related to a nonpeptidic linker molecule. No scientifically convincing rationale for the other three compounds could be established, although, at least for two compounds, their activity may be connected with the enzymatic/hormonal activity. In addition to the survey, published reports on genotoxicity testing of biotechnology products were reviewed. The data are discussed relative to whether genotoxicity testing is a valuable exercise when assessing potentially toxic liabilities of biotechnology-derived compounds. It is concluded that genotoxicity testing is generally inappropriate and unnecessary, a position which is in accordance with the available guidelines addressing this area. For the 'average' protein, electrophilic reactions are difficult to envision. Indirect reactions via DNA metabolism and growth regulation seem possible for only very specific proteins such as nucleases, growth factors, cytokines. No information on testing of different types of biotechnology-derived products (e.g., ribozymes, antisense-oligonucleotides, DNA vaccines) has been received in the questionnaires. Discussion of their potential to cause genotoxic changes was based on literature reports. Even for those products for which concerns of genotoxic/tumourigenic potential cannot be completely ruled out, e.g., because of their interaction with DNA metabolism or proliferation control, the performance of standard genotoxicity assays generally appears to be of little value. All information, including also information on the occurrence of genotoxic impurities, has been utilized to formulate a decision tree approach for the genotoxicity testing of biotechnology-derived products.     

A review of the genotoxicity of marketed pharmaceuticals

Information in the 1999 Physician's Desk Reference as well as from the peer-reviewed published literature was used to evaluate the genotoxicity of marketed pharmaceuticals. This survey is a compendium of genotoxicity information and a means to gain perspective on the inherent genotoxicity of structurally diverse pharmaceuticals. Data from 467 marketed drugs were collected. Excluded from analysis were anti-cancer drugs and nucleosides, which are expected to be genotoxic, steroids, biologicals and peptide-based drugs. Of the 467 drugs, 115 had no published gene-tox data. This group was comprised largely of acutely administered drugs such as antibiotics, antifungals, antihistamines decongestants and anesthetics. The remaining 352 had at least one standard gene-tox assay result. Of these, 101 compounds (28.7%) had at least one positive assay result in the pre-ICH/OECD standard four-test battery (bacterial mutagenesis, in vitro cytogenetics, mouse lymphoma assay (MLA), in vivo cytogenetics). Per assay type, the percentage of positive compounds was: bacterial mutagenesis test, 27/323 (8.3%); in vitro cytogenetics 55/222 (24.8%); MLA 24/96 (25%); in vivo cytogenetics 29/252 (11.5%). Of the supplemental genetic toxicology test findings reported, the sister chromatid exchange (SCE) assay had the largest percentage of positives 17/39 (43.5%) and mammalian mutagenesis assays (excluding MLA) had the lowest percentage of positives 2/91 (2.2%). The predictive value of genetic toxicology findings for 2-year bioassay outcomes is difficult to assess since carcinogenicity can occur via non-genotoxic mechanisms. Nevertheless, the following survey findings were made: 201 drugs had both gene-tox data and rodent carcinogenicity data. Of these, 124 were negative and 77 were equivocal or positive for carcinogenicity in at least 1 gender/1 species. Of the 124 non-carcinogens, 100 had no positive gene-tox findings. Of the remaining 24, 19 were positive in in vitro cytogenetics assays. Among the 77 compounds that exhibited equivocal or positive effects in carcinogenesis studies, 26 were positive in gene-tox assays and 51 were negative. Of the 51 negatives, 47 had multiple negative gene-tox assay results suggesting that these are probably non-genotoxic carcinogens. Statistical analyses suggested that no combination of gene-tox assays provided a higher predictivity of rodent carcinogenesis than the bacterial mutagenicity test itself.     

Testing strategies in mutagenicity and genetic toxicology: an appraisal of the guidelines of the European Scientific Committee for Cosmetics and Non-Food Products for the evaluation of hair dyes

The European Scientific Committee on Cosmetics and Non-Food Products (SCCNFP) guideline for testing of hair dyes for genotoxic/mutagenic/carcinogenic potential has been reviewed. The battery of six in vitro tests recommended therein differs substantially from the batteries of two or three in vitro tests recommended in other guidelines. Our evaluation of the chemical types used in hair dyes and comparison with other guidelines for testing a wide range of chemical substances, lead to the conclusion that potential genotoxic activity may effectively be determined by the application of a limited number of well-validated test systems that are capable of detecting induced gene mutations and structural and numerical chromosomal changes. We conclude that highly effective screening for genotoxicity of hair dyes can be achieved by the use of three assays, namely the bacterial gene mutation assay, the mammalian cell gene mutation assay (mouse lymphoma tk assay preferred) and the in vitro micronucleus assay. These need to be combined with metabolic activation systems optimised for the individual chemical types. Recent published evidence [D. Kirkland, M. Aardema, L. Henderson, L. Müller, Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens. I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity, Mutat. Res. 584 (2005) 1-256] suggests that our recommended three tests will detect all known genotoxic carcinogens, and that increasing the number of in vitro assays further would merely reduce specificity (increase false positives). Of course there may be occasions when standard tests need to be modified to take account of special situations such as a specific pathway of biotransformation, but this should be considered as part of routine testing. It is clear that individual dyes and any other novel ingredients should be tested in this three-test battery. However, new products are formed on the scalp by reaction between the chemicals present in hair-dye formulations. Ideally, these should also be tested for genotoxicity, but at present such experiences are very limited. There is also the possibility that one component could mask the genotoxicity of another (e.g. by being more toxic), and so it is not practical at this time to recommend routine testing of complete hair-dye formulations as well. The most sensible approach would be to establish whether any reaction products within the hair-dye formulation penetrate the skin under normal conditions of use and test only those that penetrate at toxicologically relevant levels in the three-test in vitro battery. Recently published data [D. Kirkland, M. Aardema, L. Henderson, L. Müller, Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens. I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity, Mutat. Res. 584 (2005) 1-256] suggest the three-test battery will produce a significant number of false as well as real positives. Whilst we are aware of the desire to reduce animal experiments, determining the relevance of positive results in any of the three recommended in vitro assays will most likely have to be determined by use of in vivo assays. The bone marrow micronucleus test using routes of administration such as oral or intraperitoneal may be used where the objective is extended hazard identification. If negative results are obtained in this test, then a second in vivo test should be conducted. This could be an in vivo UDS in rat liver or a Comet assay in a relevant tissue. However, for hazard characterisation, tests using topical application with measurement of genotoxicity in the skin would be more appropriate. Such specific site-of-contact in vivo tests would minimise animal toxicity burden and invasiveness, and, especially for hair dyes, be more relevant to human routes of exposure, but there are not sufficient scientific data available to allow recommendations to be made. The generation of such data is encouraged.     

Influence of cytotoxicity and compound precipitation on test results in the alkaline comet assay

We use the comet assay as part of our genotoxicity screening battery for newly synthesized drug candidates. A dataset of more than 250 tests carried out with 75 drug candidates of various chemical classes was analyzed to elucidate the influence of cytotoxicity and compound precipitation on DNA migration in the comet assay. Using a V79 Chinese hamster cell line, 38 of the compounds were negative and 37 were positive in the comet assay. The reproducibility of test results between repeat experiments was 85%. Data on 72 tests with a negative call in which the compounds were tested up to highly cytotoxic concentrations demonstrated that cytotoxicity, as determined by Trypan blue dye exclusion and occurrence of cells with completely fragmented chromatin, did not lead to false positive test results. The majority (64.2%) of compounds with a positive call induced elevated DNA migration in the absence of excessive cytotoxicity. Compound precipitation was observed in 84 tests. In 88.1% of these cases, the test result at the precipitating concentration did not differ from that found at the highest soluble concentration. Half of the remaining 11.9% of contrary results (most of them weak effects) were not reproducible in the respective repeat experiment, indicating no or only a negligible influence of precipitation on test results. The data indicate that using V79 cells, the comet assay specifically detects genotoxic effects and is not confounded by cytotoxicity or compound precipitation under the conditions used.