The mutagenic assessment of an electronic-cigarette and reference cigarette smoke using the Ames assay in strains TA98 and TA100

Mutation Research - Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis

Volumn 812, Issue , 2016, Pages 29-38

  Thorne, D ^a   Crooks, I ^a   Hollings, M ^b   Seymour, A ^b   Meredith, C ^a   Gaca, M ^a  

^a BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO   (United Kingdom)

^b UK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

ACM; Aerosol exposure; Ames; Cigarette smoke; E cigarettes; TA100; TA98; TPM; VC 10

Indexed keywords

2 AMINOANTHRACENE; 2 NITROFLUORENE; BENZO[A]PYRENE; CIGARETTE SMOKE; SODIUM AZIDE; 2-ANTHRAMINE; 2-NITROFLUORENE; AEROSOL; ANTHRACENE DERIVATIVE; FLUORENE DERIVATIVE; MUTAGENIC AGENT; PARTICULATE MATTER; PASSIVE SMOKING; SMOKE;

AEROSOL; AMES TEST; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL STRAIN; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE; EXPOSURE; METABOLIC ACTIVATION; MUTAGEN TESTING; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SALMONELLA ENTERICA SEROVAR TYPHIMURIUM; ADVERSE EFFECTS; BIOASSAY; DRUG EFFECTS; ESCHERICHIA COLI; MUTAGENESIS; PARTICULATE MATTER; PASSIVE SMOKING; PROCEDURES; SMOKE; SMOKING; TOBACCO; TOXICITY;

AEROSOLS; ANTHRACENES; BIOLOGICAL ASSAY; ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES; ESCHERICHIA COLI; FLUORENES; MUTAGENESIS; MUTAGENICITY TESTS; MUTAGENS; PARTICULATE MATTER; SALMONELLA TYPHIMURIUM; SMOKE; SMOKING; TOBACCO; TOBACCO SMOKE POLLUTION;

EID: 84999028769     PISSN: 13835718     EISSN: 18793592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2016.10.005     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. [1] OECD, Bacterial Reverse Mutation Test, in: OECD guideline for the testing of chemicals, Test Guideline 471 (1997).
2. [2] ICH-S2R1, Guidance on Genotoxicity Testing and Data Interpretation for pharmaceuticals intended for human use (2011).
3. [3] Doolittle, D., Lee, C., Ivett, J., Mirsalis, J., Riccio, E., Rudd, C., Burger, G., Hayes, A., Comparative studies on the genotoxic activity of mainstream smoke condensate from cigarettes which burn or only heat tobacco. Environ. Mol. Mutagen 15 (1990), 93–105.
4. [4] Baker, R., Massey, E., Smith, G., An overview of the effects of tobacco ingredients on smoke chemistry and toxicity. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42S (2004), 53–83.
5. [5] Scott, K., Saul, J., Crooks, I., Camacho, O., Dillon, D., Meredith, C., The resolving power of in vitro genotoxicity assays for cigarette smoke particulate matter. Toxicol. In Vitro 27 (2013), 1312–1319.
6. [6] DeMarini, D., Gudi, R., Szkudlinska, A., Rao, M., Reico, L., Kehl, M., Kirby, P., Polzin, G., Richter, P., Genotoxicity of 10 cigarette smoke condensates in four test systems: comparisons between assays and condensates. Mutat. Res. 650 (2008), 15–29.
7. [7] Steele, R., Payne, V., Fulp, C., Rees, D., Lee, C., Doolittle, D., A comparison of the mutagenicity of mainstream cigarette smoke condensates from a representative sample of the U.S. cigarette market with a Kentucky reference cigarette (K1R4F). Mutat. Res. 342 (1995), 179–190.
8. [8] Roemer, E., Tewes, F., Meisgen, J., Veltel, D., Carmines, E., Evaluation of the potential effects of ingredients added to cigarettes, part 3: in vitro genotoxicity and cytotoxicity. Food Chem. Toxicol. 40 (2002), 105–111.
9. [9] Aufderheide, M., Gressmann, H., A modified Ames assay reveals the mutagenicity of native cigarette mainstream smoke and its gas vapour phase. Exp. Toxicol. Pathol. 58 (2007), 383–392.
10. [10] Aufderheide, M., Gressmann, H., Mutagenicity of native cigarette mainstream smoke and its gas/vapour phase by use of different tester strains and cigarettes in a modified Ames assay. Mutat. Res. 656 (2008), 82–87.
11. [11] Kilford, J., Thorne, D., Payne, R., Dalrymple, A., Clements, J., Meredith, C., Dillon, D., A method for assessment of the genotoxicity of mainstream cigarette-smoke by use of the bacterial reverse-mutation assay and an aerosol-based exposure system. Mutat. Res. 769 (2014), 20–28.
12. [12] Thorne, D., Kilford, J., Hollings, M., Dalrymple, A., Ballantyne, M., Meredith, C., Dillon, D., The mutagenic assessment of mainstream cigarette smoke using the Ames assay: a multi-strain approach. Mutat. Res. 782 (2015), 9–17.
13. [13] Farsalinos, K., Polosa, R., Safety evaluation and risk assessment of electronic cigarettes as tobacco cigarette substitutes: a systematic review. Ther. Adv. Drug. Saf. 5 (2014), 67–86.
14. [14] Misra, M., Leverette, R., Cooper, B., Bennett, M., Brown, S., Comparative in vitro toxicity profile of electronic and tobacco cigarettes, smokeless tobacco and nicotine replacement therapy products: e-liquids, extracts and collected aerosols. Environ. Res., 11 2014, 11325–11347.
15. [15] Murphy, J., Lowe, F., Fearon, I., Camacho, O., Minet, E., A framework for the assessment of reduced-risk tobacco and nicotine products. Conference Proceedings, Tobacco Science Research Conference, 2015.
16. [16] Wan, J., Johnson, M., Schilz, J., Djordjevic, M., Rice, J., Shields, P., Evaluation of in vitro assays for assessing the toxicity of cigarette smoke and smokeless tobacco. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 18 (2009), 3263–3304.
17. [17] Zeiger, E., Carcinogenicity of mutagens: predictive capability of the salmonella mutagenesis assay for rodent carcinogenicity. Cancer Res. 47 (1987), 1287–1296.
18. [18] International Organization for Standardization, 1999. Tobacco and tobacco products—Atmosphere for conditioning and testing. ISO 3402:1999. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
19. [19] Maron, D., Ames, B., Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat. Res. 113 (1983), 173–215.
20. [20] De Serres, F., Shelby, M., Recommendations on data production and analysis using the Salmonella/microsome mutagenicity assay. Mutat. Res. 64 (1979), 159–165.
21. [21] Health Canada Official Method T-115. Determination of Tar, Nicotine and Carbon Monoxide in Mainstream Tobacco Smoke. Prepared by the Department of Health, December 31, 1999.
22. [22] CORESTA Recommended Method No 81, 2015. Routine analytical machine for e-cigarette aerosol generation and collection—Definitions and standard conditions. CRM No 81, 2015, http://www.coresta.org/Recommended_Methods/CRM_81.pdf, (Accessed 4th November 2015).
23. [23] Ames, B., McCann, J., Yamasaki, E., Methods for detecting carcinogens and mutagens with the Salmonella/mammalian-microsome mutagenicity test. Mutat. Res. 31 (1975), 347–364.
24. ® VC 10 in vitro smoke exposure system using dose tools and biological analysis. Chem. Cent. J., 7, 2013, 146.
25. [25] Adamson, J., Thorne, D., Errington, G., Fields, W., Li, X., Payne, R., Krebs, T., Dalrymple, A., Fowler, K., Dillon, D., Xie, F., Meredith, C., An inter-machine comparison of tobacco smoke particle deposition in vitro from six independent smoke exposure systems. Toxicol. In Vitro 28 (2014), 1320–1328.
26. ® 24/48 in vitro aerosol exposure system using mainstream cigarette smoke. Chem. Cent. J., 8, 2014, 62.
27. [27] Thorne, D., Adamson, J., A review of in vitro exposure systems. Exp. Tox. Path 65 (2013), 1183–1193.
28. [28] Bertholon, J., Becquemin, M., Roy, M., Roy, F., Ledur, D., Annesi, M., Dautzenberg, B., Comparison of the aerosol produced by electronic cigarettes with conventional cigarettes and the shisha. Rev. Mal. Respir. 30 (2013), 752–757.
29. [29] Talih, S., Balhas, Z., Eissenberg, T., Salman, R., Karaoghlanian, N., Baalbaki, R., Saliba, N., Shihadeh, A., Effects of user puff topography device voltage, and liquid nicotine concentration on electronic cigarette nicotine yield: measurements and model predictions. Nicotine Tob. Res. 17 (2015), 150–157.
30. [30] Schripp, T., Markewitz, D., Uhde, E., Salthammer, T., Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping?. Indoor Air 23 (2013), 25–31.
31. [31] Costigan, S., Meredith, C., An approach to ingredient screening and toxicological risk assessment of flavours in e-liquids. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 72 (2015), 361–369.
32. [32] Dillon, D., Combes, R., Zeiger, E., The effectiveness of Salmonella strains TA100: TA102 and TA104 for detecting mutagenicity of some aldehydes and peroxides. Mutagenesis 13 (1998), 19–26.
33. [33] Farsalinos, K., Voudris, V., Poulas, K., E-cigarettes generate high levels of aldehydes only in ‘dry puff’ conditions. Addiction 8 (2015), 1352–1356.
34. [34] Margham, J., McAdam, K., Forster, M., Liu, C., Wright, C., Mariner, D., Proctor, C., Chemical composition of an e-cigarette aerosol—a quantitative comparison with cigarette smoke. Chem. Res. Toxicol., 2016, 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188.