Quantitative assessment of the dose-response of alkylating agents in DNA repair proficient and deficient ames tester strains

Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 15-23

  Tang, Leilei ^a   Guérard, Melanie ^a   Zeller, Andreas ^a  

^a F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Ames test; DNA repair; Dose response relationship; PROAST

Indexed keywords

ETHYLNITROSOUREA; MESYLIC ACID ETHYL ESTER; MESYLIC ACID METHYL ESTER; METHYLNITROSOUREA; TEMOZOLOMIDE;

AMES TEST; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL STRAIN; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNA METHYLATION; DNA REPAIR; DOSE RESPONSE; MUTAGENICITY; NONHUMAN; SALMONELLA TYPHIMURIUM;

EID: 84890876176     PISSN: 08936692     EISSN: 10982280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/em.21825     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Proast Menu. 2012. National Institute for Public Health and Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands. Available at: http://www.rivm.nl/en/Library/Scientific/Models/PROAST. Last accessed on September 19, 2013.
2. Abril N, Luque-Romero FL, Yamada M, Nohmi T, Pueyo C. 2001. The effectiveness of the O(6)-alkylguanine-DNA alkyltransferase encoded by the ogt(ST) gene from S. typhimurium in protection against alkylating drugs, resistance to O(6)-benzylguanine and sensitisation to dibromoalkane genotoxicity. Mutat Res 497:111-121.
3. Beenken K, Cai Z, Fix D. 2001. Overexpression of Ogt reduces MNU and ENU induced transition, but not transversion, mutations in E. coli. Mutat Res 487:51-58.
4. Beland FA, Poirier MC. 1994. DNA adducts and their consequences. In: Tardiff RG, Lohmann PHM, Wogan GN, editors. Methods to Assess DNA Damage and Repair: Interspecies Comparisons. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. pp 29-55.
5. Beranek DT. 1990. Distribution of methyl and ethyl adducts following alkylation with monofunctional alkylating agents. Mutat Res 231:11-30.
6. Boysen G, Pachkowski BF, Nakamura J, Swenberg JA. 2009. The formation and biological significance of N7-guanine adducts. Mutat Res 678:76-94.
7. Bryce SM, Avlasevich SL, Bemis JC, Phonethepswath S, Dertinger SD. 2010. Miniaturized flow cytometric in vitro micronucleus assay represents an efficient tool for comprehensively characterizing genotoxicity dose-response relationships. Mutat Res 703:191-199.
8. Butenhoff JL, Chang SC, Olsen GW, Thomford PJ. 2012. Chronic dietary toxicity and carcinogenicity study with potassium perfluorooctanesulfonate in Sprague Dawley rats. Toxicology 293:1-15.
9. Cammerer Z, Bhalli JA, Cao X, Coffing SL, Dickinson D, Dobo KL, Dobrovolsky VN, Engel M, Fiedler RD, Gunther WC, et al. 2011. Report on stage III Pig-a mutation assays using N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea-comparison with other in vivo genotoxicity endpoints. Environ Mol Mutagen 52:721-730.
10. Doak SH, Brusehafer K, Dudley E, Quick E, Johnson G, Newton RP, Jenkins GJS. 2008. No-observed effect levels are associated with up-regulation of MGMT following MMS exposure. Mutat Res 648:9-14.
11. Doak SH, Jenkins GJ, Johnson GE, Quick E, Parry EM, Parry JM. 2007. Mechanistic influences for mutation induction curves after exposure to DNA-reactive carcinogens. Cancer Res 67:3904-3911.
12. Dobo KL, Fiedler RD, Gunther WC, Thiffeault CJ, Cammerer Z, Coffing SL, Shutsky T, Schuler M. 2011. Defining EMS and ENU dose-response relationships using the Pig-a mutation assay in rats. Mutat Res 725:13-21.
13. Fluckiger-Isler S, Kamber M. 2012. Direct comparison of the Ames microplate format (MPF) test in liquid medium with the standard Ames pre-incubation assay on agar plates by use of equivocal to weakly positive test compounds. Mutat Res 747:36-45.
14. Gates KS. 2009. An overview of chemical processes that damage cellular DNA: Spontaneous hydrolysis, alkylation, and reactions with radicals. Chem Res Toxicol 22:1747-1760.
15. Gocke E, Ballantyne M, Whitwell J, Muller L. 2009a. MNT and MutaMouse studies to define the in vivo dose response relations of the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. Toxicol Lett 190:286-297.
16. Gocke E, Muller L. 2009. In vivo studies in the mouse to define a threshold for the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. Mutat Res 678:101-107.
17. Gocke E, Muller L, Pfister T. 2009b. EMS in Viracept-Initial ('traditional') assessment of risk to patients based on linear dose response relations. Toxicol Lett 190:266-270.
18. Gocke E, Tang L, Singer T. 2012. Exposure to ethylating agents: Where do the thresholds for mutagenic/clastogenic effects arise? JEMS Symp 34:171-178.
19. Gocke E, Wall M. 2009. In vivo genotoxicity of EMS: Statistical assessment of the dose response curves. Toxicol Lett 190:298-302.
20. Gollapudi BB, Johnson GE, Hernandez LG, Pottenger LH, Dearfield KL, Jeffrey AM, Julien E, Kim JH, Lovell DP, MacGregor JT, et al. 2013. Quantitative approaches for assessing dose-response relationships in genetic toxicology studies. Environ Mol Mutagen 54:8-18.
21. Guerard M, Zeller A, Singer T, Gocke E. 2012. In vitro genotoxicity of neutral red after photo-activation and metabolic activation in the Ames test, the micronucleus test and the comet assay. Mutat Res 746:15-20.
22. Hernandez LG, Slob W, van Steeg H, van Benthem J. 2011. Can carcinogenic potency be predicted from in vivo genotoxicity data?: A meta-analysis of historical data. Environ Mol Mutagen 52:518-528.
23. Horsfall MJ, Gordon AJ, Burns PA, Zielenska M, van der Vliet GM, Glickman BW. 1990. Mutational specificity of alkylating agents and the influence of DNA repair. Environ Mol Mutagen 15:107-122.
24. Kaina B, Christmann M, Naumann S, Roos WP. 2007. MGMT: Key node in the battle against genotoxicity, carcinogenicity and apoptosis induced by alkylating agents. DNA Repair 6:1079-1099.
25. Kaina B, Ochs K, Grosch S, Fritz G, Lips J, Tomicic M, Dunkern T, Christmann M. 2001. BER, MGMT, and MMR in defense against alkylation-induced genotoxicity and apoptosis. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 68:41-54.
26. Knizhnik AV, Roos WP, Nikolova T, Quiros S, Tomaszowski KH, Christmann M, Kaina B. 2013. Survival and death strategies in glioma cells: Autophagy, senescence and apoptosis triggered by a single type of temozolomide-induced DNA damage. PloS One 8:e55665.
27. Lutz RW, Stahel WA, Lutz WK. 2002. Statistical procedures to test for linearity and estimate threshold doses for tumor induction with nonlinear dose-response relationships in bioassays for carcinogenicity. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 36:331-337.
28. Lutz WK, Lutz RW. 2009. Statistical model to estimate a threshold dose and its confidence limits for the analysis of sublinear dose-response relationships, exemplified for mutagenicity data. Mutat Res 678:118-122.
29. Lynch AM, Giddings A, Custer L, Gleason C, Henwood A, Aylott M, Kenny J. 2011. International Pig-a gene mutation assay trial (stage III): Results with N-methyl-N-nitrosourea. Environ Mol Mutagen 52(9):699-710.
30. Maron DM, Ames BN. 1983. Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat Res 113:173-215.
31. Mitra S. 2007. MGMT: A personal perspective. DNA Repair 6:1064-1070.
32. Mortelmans K, Zeiger E. 2000. The Ames Salmonella/microsome mutagenicity assay. Mutat Res 455:29-60.
33. Pottenger LH, Schisler MR, Zhang F, Bartels MJ, Fontaine DD, McFadden LG, Bhaskar Gollapudi B. 2009. Dose-response and operational thresholds/NOAELs for in vitro mutagenic effects from DNA-reactive mutagens, MMS and MNU. Mutat Res 678:138-147.
34. Seager AL, Shah UK, Mikhail JM, Nelson BC, Marquis BJ, Doak SH, Johnson GE, Griffiths SM, Carmichael PL, Scott SJ, et al. 2012. Pro-oxidant induced DNA damage in human lymphoblastoid cells: Homeostatic mechanisms of genotoxic tolerance. Toxicol Sci 128:387-397.
35. Sedgwick B. 2004. Repairing DNA-methylation damage. Nature Rev 5:148-157.
36. Slob W. 2002. Dose-response modeling of continuous endpoints. Toxicol Sci 66:298-312.
37. Slob W. 2007. What is a practical threshold? Toxicol Pathol 35:848-849.
38. Stern BR, Solioz M, Krewski D, Aggett P, Aw TC, Baker S, Crump K, Dourson M, Haber L, Hertzberg R, et al. 2007. Copper and human health: biochemistry, genetics, and strategies for modeling dose-response relationships. J Toxicol Environ Health Part B Crit Rev 10:157-222.
39. Suzuki M, Matsui K, Yamada M, Kasai H, Sofuni T, Nohmi T. 1997. Construction of mutants of Salmonella typhimurium deficient in 8-hydroxyguanine DNA glycosylase and their sensitivities to oxidative mutagens and nitro compounds. Mutat Res 393:233-246.
40. Vaughan P, Sedgwick B. 1991. A weak adaptive response to alkylation damage in Salmonella typhimurium. J Bacteriol 173:3656-3662.
41. Yamada M, Matsui K, Sofuni T, Nohmi T. 1997. New tester strains of Salmonella typhimurium lacking O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferases and highly sensitive to mutagenic alkylating agents. Mutat Res 381:15-24.
42. Zair ZM, Jenkins GJ, Doak SH, Singh R, Brown K, Johnson GE. 2011. N-methylpurine DNA glycosylase plays a pivotal role in the threshold response of ethyl methanesulfonate-induced chromosome damage. Toxicol Sci 119:346-358.
43. Zhang J, Stevens MF, Bradshaw TD. 2012. Temozolomide: Mechanisms of action, repair and resistance. Curr Mol Pharmacol 5:102-114.