International Commission for Protection against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. ICPEMC working paper No. 5. Genotoxicity tests as predictors of carcinogens: an analysis

Differences between the results of numerical validation studies comparing in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity tests with the rodent cancer bioassay are leading to the perception that short-term tests predict carcinogenicity only with uncertainty. Consideration of factors such as the pharmacokinetic distribution of chemicals, the systems available for metabolic activation and detoxification, the ability of the active metabolite to move from the site of production to the target DNA, and the potential for expression of the induced lesions, strongly suggests that the disparate sensitivity of the different test systems is a major reason why numerical validation is not more successful. Furthermore, genotoxicity tests should be expected to detect only a subset of carcinogens, namely genotoxic carcinogens, rather than those carcinogens that appear to act by non-genetic mechanisms. Instead of relying primarily on short-term in vitro genotoxicity tests to predict carcinogenic activity, these tests should be used in a manner that emphasizes the accurate determination of mutagenicity or clastogenicity. It must then be determined whether the mutagenic activity is further expressed as carcinogenicity in the appropriate studies using test animals. The prospects for quantitative extrapolation of in vitro or in vivo genotoxicity test results to carcinogenicity requires a much more precise understanding of the critical molecular events in both processes.     

Application of in vitro cell transformation assays in regulatory toxicology for pharmaceuticals, chemicals, food products and cosmetics

Two year rodent bioassays play a key role in the assessment of carcinogenic potential of chemicals to humans. The seventh amendment to the European Cosmetics Directive will ban in 2013 the marketing of cosmetic and personal care products that contain ingredients that have been tested in animal models. Thus 2-year rodent bioassays will not be available for cosmetics/personal care products. Furthermore, for large testing programs like REACH, in vivo carcinogenicity testing is impractical. Alternative ways to carcinogenicity assessment are urgently required. In terms of standardization and validation, the most advanced in vitro tests for carcinogenicity are the cell transformation assays (CTAs). Although CTAs do not mimic the whole carcinogenesis process in vivo, they represent a valuable support in identifying transforming potential of chemicals. CTAs have been shown to detect genotoxic as well as non-genotoxic carcinogens and are helpful in the determination of thresholds for genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. The extensive review on CTAs by the OECD (OECD (2007) Environmental Health and Safety Publications, Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 31) and the proven within- and between-laboratories reproducibility of the SHE CTAs justifies broader use of these methods to assess carcinogenic potential of chemicals.     

Genetic toxicology: can we design predictive in vivo assays?

The present analysis examines the assumptions in, the perceptions and predictivity of and the need for short-term tests (STTs) for genotoxicity in light of recent findings that most noncarcinogens from the National Toxicology Program are genotoxic (i.e., positive in one or more in vitro STTs). Reasonable assumptions about the prevalence for carcinogens (1-10% of all chemicals), the sensitivity of these STTs (ca. 90% of all carcinogens are genotoxic) and their estimated "false positive" incidence (60-75%) imply that the majority of chemicals elicit genotoxic responses and, consequently, that most in vitro genotoxins are likely to be noncarcinogenic. Thus, either the usual treatment conditions used in these in vitro STTS are producing a large proportion of artifactual and meaningless positive results or else in vitro mutagenicity is too common a property of chemicals to serve as a useful predictor of carcinogenicity or other human risk. In contrast, the limited data base on in vivo STTs suggests that the current versions of these assays may have low sensitivity which appears unlikely to improve without dropping either their 'short-term' aspect or the rodent carcinogenicity benchmark. It is suggested that in vivo genotoxicity protocols be modified to take into consideration both the fundamentals of toxicology as well as the lessons learned from in vitro genetic toxicology. In the meantime, while in vivo assays are undergoing rigorous validation, genetic toxicology, as currently practiced, should not be a formal aspect of chemical or drug development on the grounds that it is incapable of providing realistic and reliable information on human risk. It is urged that data generated in new, unvalidated in vivo genotoxicity assays be exempted from the normal regulatory reporting requirements in order to encourage industry to participate in the laborious and expensive development of this next phase of genetic toxicology.     

The alkaline single cell gel electrophoresis assay with mouse multiple organs: results with 30 aromatic amines evaluated by the IARC and U.S. NTP

The genotoxicity of 30 aromatic amines selected from IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) groups 1, 2A, 2B and 3 and from the U.S. NTP (National Toxicology Program) carcinogenicity database were evaluated using the alkaline single cell gel electrophoresis (SCG) (Comet) assay in mouse organs. We treated groups of four mice once orally at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and sampled stomach, colon, liver, kidney, bladder, lung, brain, and bone marrow 3, 8 and 24 h after treatment. For the 20 aromatic amines that are rodent carcinogens, the assay was positive in at least one organ, suggesting a high predictive ability for the assay. For most of the SCG-positive aromatic amines, the organs exhibiting increased levels of DNA damage were not necessarily the target organs for carcinogenicity. It was rare, in contrast, for the target organs not to show DNA damage. Organ-specific genotoxicity, therefore, is necessary but not sufficient for the prediction of organ-specific carcinogenicity. For the 10 non-carcinogenic aromatic amines (eight were Ames test-positive and two were Ames test-negative), the assay was negative in all organs studied. In the safety evaluation of chemicals, it is important to demonstrate that Ames test-positive agents are not genotoxic in vivo. Chemical carcinogens can be classified as genotoxic (Ames test-positive) and putative non-genotoxic (Ames test-negative) carcinogens. The alkaline SCG assay, which detects DNA lesions, is not suitable for identifying non-genotoxic carcinogens. The present SCG study revealed a high positive response ratio for rodent genotoxic carcinogens and a high negative response ratio for rodent genotoxic non-carcinogens. These results suggest that the alkaline SCG assay can be usefully used to evaluate the in vivo genotoxicity of chemicals in multiple organs, providing for a good assessment of potential carcinogenicity.     

Predictive assay for rodent carcinogenicity using in vivo biochemical parameters: operational characteristics and complementarity.

111 chemicals of known rodent carcinogenicity (49 carcinogens, 62 noncarcinogens), including many promoters of carcinogenesis, nongenotoxic carcinogens, hepatocarcinogens, and halogenated hydrocarbons, were selected for study. The chemicals were administered by gavage in two dose levels to female Sprague-Dawley rats. The effects of these 111 chemicals on 4 biochemical assays (hepatic DNA damage by alkaline elution (DD), hepatic ornithine decarboxylase activity (ODC), serum alanine aminotransferase activity (ALT), and hepatic cytochrome P-450 content (P450)) were determined. Composite parameters are defined as follows: CP = [ODC and P450), CT = [ALT and ODC), and TS = [DD or CP or CT]. The operational characteristics of TS for predicting rodent cancer were sensitivity 55%, specificity 87%, positive predictivity 77%, negative predictivity 71%, and concordance 73%. For these chemicals, the 73% concordance of this study was superior to the concordance obtained from published data from other laboratories on the Ames test (53%), structural alerts (SA) (46%), chromosome aberrations in Chinese hamster ovary cells (ABS) (48%), cell mutation in mouse lymphoma 15178Y cells (MOLY) (52%), and sister-chromatid exchange in Chinese hamster ovary cells (SCE) (60%). The 4 in vivo biochemical assays were complementary to each other. The composite parameter TS also shows complementarity to all 5 other predictors of rodent cancer examined in this paper. For example, the Ames test alone has a concordance of only 53%. In combination with TS, the concordance is increased to 62% (Ames or TS) or to 63% (Ames and TS). For the 67 chemicals with data available for SA, the concordance for predicting rodent carcinogenicity was 47% (for SA alone), 54% (for SA or TS), and 66% (for SA and TS). These biochemical assays will be useful: (1) to predict rodent carcinogenicity per se, (2) to 'confirm' the results of short-term mutagenicity tests by the high specificity mode of the biochemical assays (the specificity and positive predictivity are both 100%), and (3) to be a component of future complementary batteries of tests for predicting rodent carcinogenicity.     

Prevalence of genotoxic chemicals among animal and human carcinogens evaluated in the IARC Monograph series.

To determine whether genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens contribute similarly to the cancer burden in humans, an analysis was performed on agents that were evaluated in Supplements 6 and 7 to the IARC Monographs for their carcinogenic effects in humans and animals and for the activity in short-term genotoxicity tests. The prevalence of genotoxic carcinogens on four groups of agents, consisting of established human carcinogens (group 1, n = 30), probable human carcinogens (group 2A, n = 37), possible human carcinogens (group 2B, n = 113) and on agents with limited evidence of carcinogenicity in animals (a subset of group 3, n = 149) was determined. A high prevalence in the order of 80 to 90% of genotoxic carcinogens was found in each of the groups 1, 2A and 2B, which were also shown to be multi-species/multi-tissues carcinogens. The distribution of carcinogenic potency in rodents did not reveal any specific characteristic of the human carcinogens in group 1 that would differentiate them from agents in groups 2A, 2B and 3. The results of this analysis indicate that (a) an agent with unknown carcinogenic potential showing sufficient evidence of activity in in vitro/in vivo genotoxicity assays (involving as endpoints DNA damage and chromosomal/mutational damage) may represent a hazard to humans; and b) an agent showing lack of activity in this spectrum of genotoxicity assays should undergo evaluation for carcinogenicity by rodent bioassay, in view of the present lack of validated short-term tests for non-genotoxic carcinogens. Overall, this analysis implies that genotoxic carcinogens add more to the cancer burden in man than non-genotoxic carcinogens. Thus, identification of such genotoxic carcinogens and subsequent lowering of exposure will remain the main goal for primary cancer prevention in man.     

Artificial intelligence and Bayesian decision theory in the prediction of chemical carcinogens

Two procedures for predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals are described. One of these (CASE) is a self-learning artificial intelligence system that automatically recognizes activating and/or deactivating structural subunits of candidate chemicals and uses this to determine the probability that the test chemical is or is not a carcinogen. If the chemical is predicted to be carcinogen, CASE also projects its probable potency.

The second procedure (CPBS) uses Bayesian decision theory to predict the potential carcinogenicity of chemicals based upon the results of batteries of short-term assays. CPBS is useful even if the test results are mixed (i.e. both positive and negative responses are obtained in different genotoxic assays). CPBS can also be used to identify highly predictive as well as cost-effective batteries of assays.

For illustrative purposes the ability of CASE and CPBS to predict the carcinogenicity of a carcinogenic and a non-carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon is shown. The potential for using the two methods in tandem to increase reliability and decrease cost is presented.     

Concomitant observations of UDS in the liver and micronuclei in the bone marrow of rats exposed to cyclophosphamide or 2-acetylaminofluorene

Oral dosing of between 5–30 mg/kg of cyclophosphamide (CP) to Alderley Park rats induced micronuclei in the bone marrow between 12 and 36 h after dosing, but failed to induce unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS) in the liver at similar dose levels and treatment periods. Dose levels of > 30 mg/kg were toxic to the liver. In contrast, 2-acetylaminofluorene (2AAF) induced UDS in the rat liver between 4–36 h after dosing, but gave only a weak response in the bone marrow assay at dose levels between 0.5 and 2 g/kg. Selected observations were made for each chemical using both tissues of the same test animal.

It is concluded that an assessment of the genotoxicity in vivo of chemicals defined as genotoxic in vitro will contribute to an assessment of their possible mammalian carcinogenicity, and that these should involve assays conducted using both the bone marrow and the liver of rodents. Due to its relative ease of commission, the bone marrow micronucleus assay will usually be conducted first; in the case of negative results it is recommended that a liver genotoxicity assay should also be conducted. The case for employing in vivo short-term genotoxicity tests to predict the possible organotropic carcinogenicity or germ cell mutagenicity of a new in vitro genotoxin is discussed.     

Cobalt and antimony: genotoxicity and carcinogenicity

The purpose of this review is to summarise the data concerning genotoxicity and carcinogenicity of Co and Sb. Both metals have multiple industrial and/or therapeutical applications, depending on the considered species. Cobalt is used for the production of alloys and hard metal (cemented carbide), diamond polishing, drying agents, pigments and catalysts. Occupational exposure to cobalt may result in adverse health effects in different organs or tissues. Antimony trioxide is primarily used as a flame retardant in rubber, plastics, pigments, adhesives, textiles, and paper. Antimony potassium tartrate has been used worldwide as an anti-shistosomal drug. Pentavalent antimony compounds have been used for the treatment of leishmaniasis. Co(II) ions are genotoxic in vitro and in vivo, and carcinogenic in rodents. Co metal is genotoxic in vitro. Hard metal dust, of which occupational exposure is linked to an increased lung cancer risk, is proven to be genotoxic in vitro and in vivo. Possibly, production of active oxygen species and/or DNA repair inhibition are mechanisms involved. Given the recently provided proof for in vitro and in vivo genotoxic potential of hard metal dust, the mechanistic evidence of elevated production of active oxygen species and the epidemiological data on increased cancer risk, it may be advisable to consider the possibility of a new evaluation by IARC. Both trivalent and pentavalent antimony compounds are generally negative in non-mammalian genotoxicity tests, while mammalian test systems usually give positive results for Sb(III) and negative results for Sb(V) compounds. Assessment of the in vivo potential of Sb2O3 to induce chromosome aberrations (CA) gave conflicting results. Animal carcinogenicity data were concluded sufficient for Sb2O3 by IARC. Human carcinogenicity data is difficult to evaluate given the frequent co-exposure to arsenic. Possible mechanisms of action, including potential to produce active oxygen species and to interfere with DNA repair systems, still need further investigation.     

A core in vitro genotoxicity battery comprising the Ames test plus the in vitro micronucleus test is sufficient to detect rodent carcinogens and in vivo genotoxins

In vitro genotoxicity testing needs to include tests in both bacterial and mammalian cells, and be able to detect gene mutations, chromosomal damage and aneuploidy. This may be achieved by a combination of the Ames test (detects gene mutations) and the in vitro micronucleus test (MNvit), since the latter detects both chromosomal aberrations and aneuploidy. In this paper we therefore present an analysis of an existing database of rodent carcinogens and a new database of in vivo genotoxins in terms of the in vitro genotoxicity tests needed to detect their in vivo activity. Published in vitro data from at least one test system (most were from the Ames test) were available for 557 carcinogens and 405 in vivo genotoxins. Because there are fewer publications on the MNvit than for other mammalian cell tests, and because the concordance between the MNvit and the in vitro chromosomal aberration (CAvit) test is so high for clastogenic activity, positive results in the CAvit test were taken as indicative of a positive result in the MNvit where there were no, or only inadequate data for the latter. Also, because Hprt and Tk loci both detect gene-mutation activity, a positive Hprt test was taken as indicative of a mouse-lymphoma Tk assay (MLA)-positive, where there were no data for the latter. Almost all of the 962 rodent carcinogens and in vivo genotoxins were detected by an in vitro battery comprising Ames+MNvit. An additional 11 carcinogens and six in vivo genotoxins would apparently be detected by the MLA, but many of these had not been tested in the MNvit or CAvit tests. Only four chemicals emerge as potentially being more readily detected in MLA than in Ames+MNvit--benzyl acetate, toluene, morphine and thiabendazole--and none of these are convincing cases to argue for the inclusion of the MLA in addition to Ames+MNvit. Thus, there is no convincing evidence that any genotoxic rodent carcinogens or in vivo genotoxins would remain undetected in an in vitro test battery consisting of Ames+MNvit.     

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.     

Mutagenic activity of carcinogens detected in transgenic rodent mutagenicity assays at dose levels used in chronic rodent cancer bioassays

Data on transgenic rodent mutagenicity of five human carcinogens were summarised and compared with the results from rodent carcinogenicity studies. Four out of five carcinogens showed mutagenic activity already at daily dose levels which induced cancer in long-term rodent bioassays in at least one target tissue of carcinogenesis. In several of these studies, even single dose applications were sufficient to significantly increase the mutation frequency in vivo. Other genotoxic carcinogens required application of multiple dosing at dose-levels used in rodent cancer bioassays to show their in vivo mutagenicity. A rodent respiratory tract carcinogen, 1,2-dibromoethane (DBE), following inhalation exposure, displayed no mutagenic activity, neither in lung nor in nasal mucosa, at a single 2-h exposure to 30 ppm, which is below the highest concentration used in a NTP cancer bioassay. In contrast, after multiple treatment for 10 days at the same daily doses, a significant increase of the mutation frequency in nasal mucosa was apparent. We conclude, that especially when studying new chemicals in these transgenic rodent mutation assays, a multiple dosing protocol should be preferred. For dose selection, the same criteria could be applied as for chronic rodent bioassays.     

Carcinogenicity of the aromatic amines: from structure-activity relationships to mechanisms of action and risk assessment

Aromatic amines represent one of the most important classes of industrial and environmental chemicals: many of them have been reported to be powerful carcinogens and mutagens, and/or hemotoxicants. Their toxicity has been studied also with quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) methods: these studies are potentially suitable for investigating mechanisms of action and for estimating the toxicity of compounds lacking experimental determinations. In this paper, we first summarized the QSAR models for the rodent carcinogenicity of the aromatic amines. The gradation of potency of the carcinogenic amines depended firstly on their hydrophobicity, and secondly on electronic (reactivity, propensity to be metabolically transformed) and steric properties. On the contrary, the difference between carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic aromatic amines depended mainly on electronic and steric properties. These QSARs can be used directly for estimating the carcinogenicity of aromatic amines. A two-step prediction is possible: (1) estimation of yes/no activity; (2) if the answer from step 1 is yes, then prediction of the degree of potency. The QSARs for rodent carcinogenicity were put in a wider context by comparing them with those for: (a) Salmonella mutagenicity; (b) general toxicity; (c) enzymatic reactions; (d) physical-chemical reactions. This comparative QSAR exercise generated a coherent global picture of the action mechanisms of the aromatic amines. The QSARs for carcinogenicity were similar to those for Salmonella mutagenicity, thus pointing to a similar mechanism of action. On the contrary, the general toxicity QSARs (both in vitro and in vivo systems) were mostly based on hydrophobicity, pointing to an aspecific mechanism of action much simpler than that for carcinogenicity and mutagenicity. The oxidation of the amines (first step in the main metabolic pathway leading to carcinogenic and mutagenic species) had identical QSARs in both enzymatic and physical-chemical systems, thus providing evidence for the link between simple chemical reactions and those in biological systems. The results show that it is possible to generate mechanistically and statistically sound QSAR models for rodent carcinogenicity, and indirectly that the rodent bioassay is a reliable source of good quality data.     

Synergy between systemic toxicity and genotoxicity: relevance to human cancer risk

The health risk manager and policy analyst must frequently make recommendations based upon incomplete toxicity data. This is a situation which is encountered in the evaluation of human carcinogenic risks as animal cancer bioassay results are often not available. In this study, in order to assess the relevance of other possible indicators of carcinogenic risks, we used the "chemical diversity approach" to estimate the magnitude of the human carcinogenic risk based upon Salmonella mutagenicity and systemic toxicity data of the "universe of chemicals" to which humans have the potential to be exposed. Analyses of the properties of 10,000 agents representative of the "universe of chemicals" suggest that chemicals that have genotoxic potentials as well as exhibiting greater systemic toxicity are more likely to be carcinogens than non-genotoxicants or agents that exhibit lesser toxicity. Since "genotoxic" carcinogenicity is a hallmark of recognized human carcinogens, these findings are relevant to human cancer risk assessment.     

Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens II. Further analysis of mammalian cell results, relative predictivity and tumour profiles

One of the consequences of the low specificity of the in vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity assays reported in our previous paper [D. Kirkland, M. Aardema, L. Henderson, L. Muller, 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] is industry and regulatory agencies dealing with a large number of false-positive results during the safety assessment of new chemicals and drugs. Addressing positive results from in vitro genotoxicity assays to determine which are "false" requires extensive resources, including the conduct of additional animal studies. In order to reduce animal usage, and to conserve industry and regulatory agency resources, we thought it was important to raise the question as to whether the protocol requirements for a valid in vitro assay or the criteria for a positive result could be changed in order to increase specificity without a significant loss in sensitivity of these tests. We therefore analysed some results of the mouse lymphoma assay (MLA) and the chromosomal aberration (CA) test obtained for rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens in more detail. For a number of chemicals that are positive only in either of these mammalian cell tests (i.e. negative in the Ames test) there was no correlation between rodent carcinogenicity and level of toxicity (we could not analyse this for the CA test as insufficient data were available in publications), magnitude of response or lowest effective positive concentration. On the basis of very limited in vitro and in vivo data, we could also find no correlation between the above parameters and formation of DNA adducts. Therefore, a change to the current criteria for required level of toxicity in the MLA, to limit positive calls to certain magnitudes of response, or to certain concentration ranges would not improve the specificity of the tests without significantly reducing the sensitivity. We also investigated a possible correlation between tumour profile (trans-species, trans-sex and multi-site versus single-species, single-sex and single-site) and pattern of genotoxicity results. Carcinogens showing the combination of trans-species, trans-sex and multi-site tumour profile were much more prevalent (70% more) in the group of chemicals giving positive results in all three in vitro assays than amongst those giving all negative results. However, single-species, single-sex, single-site carcinogens were not very prevalent even amongst those chemicals giving three negative results in vitro. Surprisingly, when mixed positive and negative results were compared, multi-site carcinogens were highly prevalent amongst chemicals giving only a single positive result in the battery of three in vitro tests. Finally we extended our relative predictivity (RP) calculations to combinations of positive and negative results in the genotoxicity battery. For two out of three tests positive, the RP for carcinogenicity was no higher than 1.0 and for 2/3 tests negative the RP for non-carcinogenicity was either zero (for Ames+MLA+MN) or 1.7 (for Ames+MLA+CA). Thus, all values were less than a meaningful RP of two, and indicate that it is not possible to predict outcome of the rodent carcinogenicity study when only 2/3 genotoxicity results are in agreement.     

The genetic toxicity of human carcinogens and its implications

23 chemicals and chemical combinations have been designated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as causally associated with cancer in humans. The literature was searched for reports of their activity in the Salmonella mutagenicity assay and for evidence of their ability to induce chromosome aberrations or micronuclei in the bone marrow of mice or rats. In addition, the chemical structures of these carcinogens were assessed for the presence of electrophilic substituents that might be associated with their mutagenicity and carcinogenicity. The purpose of this study was to determine which human carcinogens exhibit genetic toxicity in vitro and in vivo and to what extent they can be detected using these two widely employed short-term tests for genetic toxicity. The results of this study revealed 20 of the 23 carcinogens to be active in one or both short-term tests. Treosulphan, for which short-term test results are not available, is predicted to be active based on its structure. The remaining two agents, asbestos and conjugated estrogens, are not mutagenic to Salmonella; asbestos is not likely to induce cytogenetic effects in the bone marrow and the potential activity of conjugated estrogens in the bone marrow is difficult to anticipate. These findings show that genetic toxicity is characteristic of the majority of IARC Group 1 human carcinogens. If these chemicals are considered representative of human carcinogens, then two short-term tests may serve as an effective primary screen for chemicals that present a carcinogenic hazard to humans.     

Report of the IWGT working group on strategies and interpretation of regulatory in vivo tests I. Increases in micronucleated bone marrow cells in rodents that do not indicate genotoxic hazards

In vivo genotoxicity tests play a pivotal role in genotoxicity testing batteries. They are used both to determine if potential genotoxicity observed in vitro is realised in vivo and to detect any genotoxic carcinogens that are poorly detected in vitro. It is recognised that individual in vivo genotoxicity tests have limited sensitivity but good specificity. Thus, a positive result from the established in vivo assays is taken as strong evidence for genotoxic carcinogenicity of the compound tested. However, there is a growing body of evidence that compound-related disturbances in the physiology of the rodents used in these assays can result in increases in micronucleated cells in the bone marrow that are not related to the intrinsic genotoxicity of the compound under test. For rodent bone marrow or peripheral blood micronucleus tests, these disturbances include changes in core body temperature (hypothermia and hyperthermia) and increases in erythropoiesis following prior toxicity to erythroblasts or by direct stimulation of cell division in these cells. This paper reviews relevant data from the literature and also previously unpublished data obtained from a questionnaire devised by the IWGT working group. Regulatory implications of these findings are discussed and flow diagrams have been provided to aid in interpretation and decision-making when such changes in physiology are suspected.     

Cluster analysis in predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals using short-term assays

Cluster analysis can be a useful tool for exploratory data analysis to uncover natural groupings in data, and initiate new ideas and hypotheses about such groupings. When applied to short-term assay results, it provides and improves estimates for the sensitivity and specificity of assays, provides indications of association between assays and, in turn, which assays can be substituted for one another in a battery, and allows a data base containing test results on chemicals of unknown carcinogenicity to be linked to a data base for which animal carcinogenicity data are available. Cluster analysis was applied to the Gene-Tox data base (which contains short-term test results on chemicals of both known and unknown carcinogenicity). The results on chemicals of known carcinogenicity were different from those obtained when the entire data base was analyzed. This suggests that the associations (and possibly the sensitivities and specificities) which are based on chemicals of known carcinogenicity may not be representative of the true measures. Cluster analysis applied to the total data base should be useful in improving these estimates. Many of the associations between the assays which were found through the use of cluster analysis could be 'validated' based on previous knowledge of the mechanistic basis of the various tests, but some of the associations were unsuspected. These associations may be a reflection of a non-ideal data base. As additional data becomes available and new clustering techniques for handling non-ideal data bases are developed, results from such analyses could play an increasing role in strengthening prediction schemes which utilize short-term tests results to screen chemicals for carcinogenicity, such as the carcinogenicity and battery selection (CPBS) method (Chankong et al., 1985).     

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.     

Cell transformation assays: are we barking up the wrong tree?

There has been a current resurgence of interest in the use of cell transformation for predicting carcinogenicity, which is based mainly on rodent carcinogenicity data. In view of this renewed interest, this paper critically reviews the published literature concerning the ability of the available assays to detect IARC Group 1 agents (known human carcinogens) and Group 2A agents (probable human carcinogens). The predictivity of the available assays for human and rodent non-genotoxic carcinogens (NGCs), in comparison with standard and supplementary in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity tests, is also discussed. The principal finding is that a surprising number of human carcinogens have not been tested for cell transformation across the three main assays (SHE, Balb/c 3T3 and C3H10T1/2), confounding comparative assessment of these methods for detecting human carcinogens. This issue is not being addressed in the ongoing validation studies for the first two of these assays, despite the lack of any serious logistical issues associated with the use of most of these chemicals. In addition, there seem to be no plans for using exogenous bio-transformation systems for the metabolic activation of pro-carcinogens, as recommended in an ECVAM workshop held in 1999. To address these important issues, it is strongly recommended that consideration be given to the inclusion of more human carcinogens and an exogenous source of xenobiotic metabolism, such as an S9 fraction, in ongoing and future validation studies. While cell transformation systems detect a high level of NGCs, it is considered premature to rely only on this endpoint for screening for such chemicals, as recently suggested. This is particularly important, in view of the fact that there is still doubt as to the relevance of morphological transformation to tumorigenesis in vivo, and the wide diversity of potential mechanisms by which NGCs are known to act. Recent progress with regard to increasing the objectivity of scoring the transformed phenotype, and prospects for developing human cell-based transformation assays, are reviewed.