Stefan Pfuhler

ECVAM retrospective validation of in vitro micronucleus test (MNT)

In the past decade several studies comparing the in vitro chromosome aberration test (CAT) and the in vitro micronucleus test (MNT) were performed. A high correlation was observed in each of the studies (>85%); however, no formal validation for the micronucleus in vitro assay had been carried out. Therefore, a working group was established by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) to perform a retrospective validation of the existing data, in order to evaluate the validity of the in vitro MNT on the basis of the modular validation approach. The primary focus of this retrospective validation was on the evaluation of the potential of the in vitro MNT as alternative to the standard in vitro CAT. The working group evaluated, in a first step, the available published data and came to the conclusion that two studies [German ring trial, von der Hude, W., Kalweit, S., Engelhardt, G. et al. (2000) In-vitro micronucleus assay with Chinese hamster V79 cells: results of a collaborative study with 26 chemicals. Mutat. Res., 468, 137–163, and SFTG International Collaborative Study, Lorge, E., Thybaud, V., Aardema, M., Oliver, J., Wataka, A., Lorenzon, G. and Marzin, D. (2006) SFTG International Collaborative Study on in-vitro micronucleus test I. General conditions and overall conclusions of the study. Mutat. Res., 607, 13–36] met the criteria for a retrospective validation according to the criteria previously defined by the working group. These two studies were evaluated in depth (including the reanalysis of raw data) and provided the information required for assessing the reliability (reproducibility) of the test. For the assessment of the concordance between the in vitro MNT and the in vitro CAT, additional published data were considered. Based on this retrospective validation, the ECVAM Validation Management Team concluded that the in vitro MNT is reliable and relevant and can therefore be used as an alternative method to the in vitro CAT. Following peer review, these conclusions were formally endorsed by the ECVAM Scientific Advisory Committee.

Reduction of use of animals in regulatory genotoxicity testing : Identification and implementation opportunities-Report from an ECVAM workshop

In vivo genetic toxicology tests measure direct DNA damage or the formation of gene or chromosomal mutations, and are used to predict the mutagenic and carcinogenic potential of compounds for regulatory purposes and/or to follow-up positive results from in vitro testing. These tests are widely used and consume large numbers of animals, with a foreseeable marked increase as a result of the EU chemicals legislation (REACH), which may require follow-up of any positive outcome in the in vitro standard battery with appropriate in vivo tests, regardless of the tonnage level of the chemical. A 2-day workshop with genotoxicity experts from academia, regulatory agencies and industry was hosted by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) in Ranco, Italy from 24 to 25 June 2008. The objectives of the workshop were to discuss how to reduce the number of animals in standard genotoxicity tests, whether the application of smarter test strategies can lead to lower animal numbers, and how the possibilities for reduction can be promoted and implemented. The workshop agreed that there are many reduction options available that are scientifically credible and therefore ready for use. Most of these are compliant with regulatory guidelines, i.e. the use of one sex only, one administration and two sampling times versus two or three administrations and one sampling time for micronucleus (MN), chromosomal aberration (CA) and Comet assays; and the integration of the MN endpoint into repeat-dose toxicity studies. The omission of a concurrent positive control in routine CA and MN tests has been proven to be scientifically acceptable, although the OECD guidelines still require this; also the combination of acute MN and Comet assay studies are compliant with guidelines, except for sampling times. Based on the data presented at the workshop, the participants concluded that these options have not been sufficiently utilized to date. Key factors for this seem to be the uncertainty regarding regulatory compliance/acceptance, lack of awareness, and an in many cases unjustified uncertainty regarding the scientific acceptance of reduction options. The workshop therefore encourages the use and promotion of these options as well as the dissemination of data related to reduction opportunities by the scientific community in order to boost the acceptance level of these approaches. Furthermore, experimental proof is needed and under way to demonstrate the credibility of additional options for reduction of the number of animals, such as the integration of the Comet assay into repeat-dose toxicity studies.

Silica nanoparticles administered at the maximum tolerated dose induce genotoxic effects through an inflammatory reaction while gold nanoparticles do not

While the collection of genotoxicity data and insights into potential mechanisms of action for nano-sized particulate materials (NPs) are steadily increasing, there is great uncertainty whether current standard assays are suitable to appropriately characterize potential risks. We investigated the effects of NPs in an in vivo Comet/micronucleus (MN) combination assay and in an in vitro MN assay performed with human blood. We also incorporated additional endpoints into the in vivo study in an effort to delineate primary from secondary mechanisms. Amorphous silica NPs (15 and 55 nm) were chosen for their known reactivity, while gold nano/microparticles (2, 20, and 200 nm) were selected for their wide size range and lower reactivity. DNA damage in liver, lung and blood cells and micronuclei in circulating reticulocytes were measured after 3 consecutive intravenous injections to male Wistar rats at 48, 24 and 4h before sacrifice. Gold nano/microparticles were negative for MN induction in vitro and in vivo, and for the induction of DNA damage in all tissues. Silica particles, however, caused a small but reproducible increase in DNA damage and micronucleated reticulocytes when tested at their maximum tolerated dose (MTD). No genotoxic effects were observed at lower doses, and the in vitro MN assay was also negative. We hypothesize that silica NPs initiate secondary genotoxic effects through release of inflammatory cell-derived oxidants, similar to that described for crystalline silica (quartz). Such a mechanism is supported by the occurrence of increased neutrophilic infiltration, necrosis, and apoptotic cells in the liver, and induction of inflammatory markers TNF-α and IL-6 in plasma at the MTDs. These results were fairly consistent between silica NPs and the quartz control, thereby strengthening the argument that silica NPs may act in a similar, thresholded manner. The observed profile is supportive of a secondary genotoxicity mechanism that is driven by inflammation.

Use of human in vitro skin models for accurate and ethical risk assessment: metabolic considerations.

Several human skin models employing primary cells and immortalized cell lines used as monocultures or combined to produce reconstituted 3D skin constructs have been developed. Furthermore, these models have been included in European genotoxicity and sensitization/irritation assay validation projects. In order to help interpret data, Cosmetics Europe (formerly COLIPA) facilitated research projects that measured a variety of defined phase I and II enzyme activities and created a complete proteomic profile of xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes (XMEs) in native human skin and compared them with data obtained from a number of in vitro models of human skin. Here, we have summarized our findings on the current knowledge of the metabolic capacity of native human skin and in vitro models and made an overall assessment of the metabolic capacity from gene expression, proteomic expression, and substrate metabolism data. The known low expression and function of phase I enzymes in native whole skin were reflected in the in vitro models. Some XMEs in whole skin were not detected in in vitro models and vice versa, and some major hepatic XMEs such as cytochrome P450-monooxygenases were absent or measured only at very low levels in the skin. Conversely, despite varying mRNA and protein levels of phase II enzymes, functional activity of glutathione S-transferases, N-acetyltransferase 1, and UDP-glucuronosyltransferases were all readily measurable in whole skin and in vitro skin models at activity levels similar to those measured in the liver. These projects have enabled a better understanding of the contribution of XMEs to toxicity endpoints.

A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: genotoxicity. A COLIPA analysis.

For the assessment of genotoxic effects of cosmetic ingredients, a number of well-established and regulatory accepted in vitro assays are in place. A caveat to the use of these assays is their relatively low specificity and high rate of false or misleading positive results. Due to the 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive ban on in vivo genotoxicity testing for cosmetics that was enacted March 2009, it is no longer possible to conduct follow-up in vivo genotoxicity tests for cosmetic ingredients positive in in vitro genotoxicity tests to further assess the relevance of the in vitro findings. COLIPA, the European Cosmetics Association, has initiated a research programme to improve existing and develop new in vitro methods. A COLIPA workshop was held in Brussels in April 2008 to analyse the best possible use of available methods and approaches to enable a sound assessment of the genotoxic hazard of cosmetic ingredients. Common approaches of cosmetic companies are described, with recommendations for evaluating in vitro genotoxins using non-animal approaches. A weight of evidence approach was employed to set up a decision-tree for the integration of alternative methods into tiered testing strategies.

Comet assay in reconstructed 3D human epidermal skin models – investigation of intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility with coded chemicals

Reconstructed 3D human epidermal skin models are being used increasingly for safety testing of chemicals. Based on EpiDerm™ tissues, an assay was developed in which the tissues were topically exposed to test chemicals for 3h followed by cell isolation and assessment of DNA damage using the comet assay. Inter-laboratory reproducibility of the 3D skin comet assay was initially demonstrated using two model genotoxic carcinogens, methyl methane sulfonate (MMS) and 4-nitroquinoline-n-oxide, and the results showed good concordance among three different laboratories and with in vivo data. In Phase 2 of the project, intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility was investigated with five coded compounds with different genotoxicity liability tested at three different laboratories. For the genotoxic carcinogens MMS and N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea, all laboratories reported a dose-related and statistically significant increase (P < 0.05) in DNA damage in every experiment. For the genotoxic carcinogen, 2,4-diaminotoluene, the overall result from all laboratories showed a smaller, but significant genotoxic response (P < 0.05). For cyclohexanone (CHN) (non-genotoxic in vitro and in vivo, and non-carcinogenic), an increase compared to the solvent control acetone was observed only in one laboratory. However, the response was not dose related and CHN was judged negative overall, as was p-nitrophenol (p-NP) (genotoxic in vitro but not in vivo and non-carcinogenic), which was the only compound showing clear cytotoxic effects. For p-NP, significant DNA damage generally occurred only at doses that were substantially cytotoxic (>30% cell loss), and the overall response was comparable in all laboratories despite some differences in doses tested. The results of the collaborative study for the coded compounds were generally reproducible among the laboratories involved and intra-laboratory reproducibility was also good. These data indicate that the comet assay in EpiDerm™ skin models is a promising model for the safety assessment of compounds with a dermal route of exposure.

Genotoxicity of nanomaterials: Refining strategies and tests for hazard identification

A workshop addressing strategies for the genotoxicity assessment of nanomaterials (NMs) was held on October 23, 2010 in Fort Worth Texas, USA. The workshop was organized by the Environmental Mutagen Society and the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute. The workshop was attended by more than 80 participants from academia, regulatory agencies, and industry from North America, Europe and Japan. A plenary session featured summaries of the current status and issues related to the testing of NMs for genotoxic properties, as well as an update on international activities and regulatory approaches. This was followed by breakout sessions and a plenary session devoted to independent discussions of in vitro assays, in vivo assays, and the need for new assays or new approaches to develop a testing strategy for NMs. Each of the standard assays was critiqued as a resource for evaluation of NMs, and it became apparent that none was appropriate without special considerations or modifications. The need for nanospecific positive controls was questioned, as was the utility of bacterial assays. The latter was thought to increase the importance of including mammalian cell gene mutation assays into the test battery. For in‐vivo testing, to inform the selection of appropriate tests or protocols, it was suggested to run repeated dose studies first to learn about disposition, potential accumulation, and possible tissue damage. It was acknowledged that mechanisms may be at play that a standard genotoxicity battery may not be able to capture. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 54:229–239, 2013.

Critical issues with the in vivo comet assay: A report of the comet assay working group in the 6th International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT)

As a part of the 6th IWGT, an expert working group on the comet assay evaluated critical topics related to the use of the in vivo comet assay in regulatory genotoxicity testing. The areas covered were: identification of the domain of applicability and regulatory acceptance, identification of critical parameters of the protocol and attempts to standardize the assay, experience with combination and integration with other in vivo studies, demonstration of laboratory proficiency, sensitivity and power of the protocol used, use of different tissues, freezing of samples, and choice of appropriate measures of cytotoxicity. The standard protocol detects various types of DNA lesions but it does not detect all types of DNA damage. Modifications of the standard protocol may be used to detect additional types of specific DNA damage (e.g., cross-links, bulky adducts, oxidized bases). In addition, the working group identified critical parameters that should be carefully controlled and described in detail in every published study protocol. In vivo comet assay results are more reliable if they were obtained in laboratories that have demonstrated proficiency. This includes demonstration of adequate response to vehicle controls and an adequate response to a positive control for each tissue being examined. There was a general agreement that freezing of samples is an option but more data are needed in order to establish generally accepted protocols. With regard to tissue toxicity, the working group concluded that cytotoxicity could be a confounder of comet results. It is recommended to look at multiple parameters such as histopathological observations, organ-specific clinical chemistry as well as indicators of tissue inflammation to decide whether compound-specific toxicity might influence the result. The expert working group concluded that the alkaline in vivo comet assay is a mature test for the evaluation of genotoxicity and can be recommended to regulatory agencies for use.

The reconstructed skin micronucleus assay (RSMN) in EpiDerm™: Detailed protocol and harmonized scoring atlas

The European Cosmetic Toiletry and Perfumery Association (COLIPA), along with contributions from the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), initiated a multi-lab international prevalidation project on the reconstructed skin micronucleus (RSMN) assay in EpiDerm™ for the assessment of the genotoxicity of dermally applied chemicals. The first step of this project was to standardize the protocol and transfer it to laboratories that had not performed the assay before. Here we describe in detail the protocol for the RSMN assay in EpiDerm™ and the harmonized guidelines for scoring, with an atlas of cell images. We also describe factors that can influence the performance of the assay. Use of these methods will help new laboratories to conduct the assay, thereby further increasing the database for this promising new in vitro genotoxicity test.

Can in vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity test results be used to complement positive results in the Ames test and help predict carcinogenic or in vivo genotoxic activity? I. Reports of individual databases presented at an EURL ECVAM Workshop

Positive results in the Ames test correlate well with carcinogenic potential in rodents. This correlation is not perfect because mutations are only one of many stages in tumour development. Also, situations can be envisaged where the mutagenic response may be specific to the bacteria or the test protocol, e.g., bacterial-specific metabolism, exceeding a detoxification threshold, or the induction of oxidative damage to which bacteria may be more sensitive than mammalian cells in vitro or tissues in vivo. Since most chemicals are also tested for genotoxicity in mammalian cells, the pattern of mammalian cell results may help identify whether Ames-positive results predict carcinogenic or in vivo mutagenic activity. A workshop was therefore organised and sponsored by the EU Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing (EURL ECVAM) to investigate this further. Participants presented results from other genotoxicity tests with Ames-positive compounds. Data came from published, regulatory agency, and industry sources. The question was posed whether negative results in mammalian cell tests were associated with absence of carcinogenic or in vivo genotoxic activity despite a positive Ames test. In the limited time available, the presented data were combined and an initial analysis suggested that the association of negative in vitro mammalian cell test results with lack of in vivo genotoxic or carcinogenic activity could have some significance. Possible reasons why a positive Ames test may not be associated with in vivo activity and what additional investigations/tests might contribute to a more robust evaluation were discussed. Because a considerable overlap was identified among the different databases presented, it was recommended that a consolidated database be built, with overlapping chemicals removed, so that a more robust analysis of the predictive capacity for potential carcinogenic and in vivo genotoxic activity could be derived from the patterns of mammalian cell test results obtained for Ames-positive compounds.