Recommended criteria for the evaluation of bacterial mutagenicity data (Ames test)

被引:56
|
作者
Levy, Dan D. [1 ]
Zeiger, Errol [2 ]
Escobar, Patricia A. [3 ]
Hakura, Atsushi [4 ]
van der Leede, Bas-jan M. [5 ]
Kato, Masayuki [6 ]
Moore, Martha M. [7 ]
Sugiyama, Kei-ichi [8 ]
机构
[1] US FDA, Ctr Food Safety & Appl Nutr, College Pk, MD 20740 USA
[2] Errol Zeiger Consulting, Chapel Hill, NC 27514 USA
[3] Merck & Co Inc, West Point, PA USA
[4] Eisai & Co Ltd, Tsukuba Drug Safety, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 3002635, Japan
[5] Janssen Res & Dev, Nonclin Safety, Beerse, Belgium
[6] CMIC Pharma Sci Co Ltd, Hokuto, Yamanashi, Japan
[7] Ramboll US Corp, Little Rock, AR 72201 USA
[8] Natl Inst Hlth Sci, Div Genet & Mutagenesis, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 2109501, Japan
关键词
Ames; Regulatory testing; Interpretation criteria; SALMONELLA-TYPHIMURIUM TA102; ASSAYS;
D O I
10.1016/j.mrgentox.2019.07.004
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
A committee was constituted within the International Workshop on Genetic Toxicology Testing (IWGT) to evaluate the current criteria for a valid Ames test and to provide recommendations for interpretation of test results. Currently, determination of a positive vs. a negative result is made by applying various data evaluation procedures for comparing dosed plates with the concurrent solvent control plates. These evaluation procedures include a requirement for a specific fold increase (2- or 3-fold, specific to the bacterial strain), formal statistical procedures, or subjective (expert judgment) evaluation. After extensive discussion, the workgroup was not able to reach consensus recommendations in favor of any of these procedures. There was a consensus that combining additional evaluation criteria to the comparison between dosed plates and the concurrent solvent control plates improves test interpretation. The workgroup recommended using these additional criteria because the induction of mutations is a continuum of responses and there is no biological relevance to a strict dividing line between a positive (mutagenic) and not-positive (nonmutagenic) response. The most useful additional criteria identified were a concentration-response relationship and consideration of a possible increase above the concurrent control in the context of the laboratory's historical solvent control values for the particular tester strain. The workgroup also emphasized the need for additional testing to resolve weak or inconclusive responses, usually with altered experimental conditions chosen based on the initial results. Use of these multiple criteria allowed the workgroup to reach consensus on definitions of "clear positive" and "clear negative" responses which would not require a repeat test for clarification. The workgroup also reached consensus on recommendations to compare the responses of concurrent positive and negative controls to historical control distributions for assay acceptability, and the use of control charts to determine the validity of the individual test.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparative Evaluation of in Silico Systems for Ames Test Mutagenicity Prediction: Scope and Limitations
    Hillebrecht, Alexander
    Muster, Wolfgang
    Brigo, Alessandro
    Kansy, Manfred
    Weiser, Thomas
    Singer, Thomas
    CHEMICAL RESEARCH IN TOXICOLOGY, 2011, 24 (06) : 843 - 854
  • [32] Mutagenicity of a series efficacious benzoxazine derivatives - a new approach to evaluate ames test data
    Foto, E.
    Zilifdar, F.
    Yilmaz, S.
    Saracbasi, T.
    Yalcin, I.
    Diril, N.
    FEBS JOURNAL, 2016, 283 : 186 - 187
  • [33] Mixture deconvolution and analysis of Ames mutagenicity data
    Young, SS
    Gombar, VK
    Emptage, MR
    Cariello, NF
    Lambert, C
    CHEMOMETRICS AND INTELLIGENT LABORATORY SYSTEMS, 2002, 60 (1-2) : 5 - 11
  • [34] A REPORT ON THE NON-MUTAGENICITY OF QINGHAOSU BY THE AMES' TEST
    李广义
    金玉生
    王志琪
    杨立新
    薛宝云
    戴日英
    姚宝琴
    Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1981, (02) : 113 - 114
  • [35] In silico predictions of Ames test mutagenicity: An integrated approach
    Deag, E.
    Modi, S.
    Li, J.
    Malcomber, S.
    Moore, C.
    Scott, A.
    Carmichael, P.
    TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, 2010, 196 : S171 - S171
  • [36] THE MUTAGENICITY OF SOME SPANISH EDIBLE MUSHROOMS IN THE AMES TEST
    MORALES, P
    BERMUDEZ, E
    HERNANDEZ, PE
    SANZ, B
    FOOD CHEMISTRY, 1990, 38 (04) : 279 - 288
  • [37] DNA-BINDING AND MUTAGENICITY IN THE AMES TEST WITH TRENBOLONE
    DEUBER, R
    SAGELSDORFF, P
    FRIEDERICH, U
    SCHLATTER, C
    LUTZ, WK
    EXPERIENTIA, 1986, 42 (06): : 697 - 697
  • [38] Integrated in silico approaches for the prediction of Ames test mutagenicity
    Modi, Sandeep
    Li, Jin
    Malcomber, Sophie
    Moore, Claire
    Scott, Andrew
    White, Andrew
    Carmichael, Paul
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-AIDED MOLECULAR DESIGN, 2012, 26 (09) : 1017 - 1033
  • [39] Evolutionary ensemble for in silico prediction of Ames test mutagenicity
    Chen, Huanhuan
    Yao, Xin
    ADVANCED INTELLIGENT COMPUTING THEORIES AND APPLICATIONS, PROCEEDINGS: WITH ASPECTS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2007, 4682 : 1162 - 1171