Susceptibility of lung epithelial cells to alkylating genotoxic insult

Ethylene oxide suppresses boar sperm function during capacitation

Ethylene oxide (E.O) is an epoxide compound, and it has been utilized as a sterilizer or production of ether compounds in several industries. Although the toxic effects of E.O on bacteria and mammals have been reported, its effects on male reproductive toxicity during sperm capacitation are not fully understood. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the effects of E.O exposure during sperm capacitation. Boar spermatozoa were treated with various E.O concentrations (0, 0.1, 1, 10, and 100 μМ). After exposure, sperm motility, motion kinematics, capacitation status, intracellular ATP levels, cell viability, expression levels of protein kinase A (PKA) activation, and tyrosine phosphorylation were evaluated. Results revealed that E.O exposure significantly decreased sperm motility, motion kinematics, and intracellular ATP levels but significantly increased the capacitated spermatozoa. In addition, the PKA activation and tyrosine phosphorylation were abnormally changed. According to our results, E.O may cause toxic effects on sperm function during capacitation, which induces male reproductive toxicity. Consequently, we suggest that male reproductive toxicity should be considered when using E.O.

Carcinogenicity of ethylene oxide: key findings and scientific issues

In support of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed an evaluation of the inhalation carcinogenicity of ethylene oxide (EtO) in December 2016. This article reviews key findings and scientific issues regarding the carcinogenicity of EtO in EPA's Carcinogenicity Assessment. EPA's assessment critically reviewed and characterized epidemiologic, laboratory animal, and mechanistic studies pertaining to the human carcinogenicity of EtO, and addressed some key scientific issues such as the analysis of mechanistic data as part of the cancer hazard evaluation and to inform the quantitative risk assessment. The weight of evidence from the epidemiologic, laboratory animal, and mechanistic studies supports a conclusion that EtO is carcinogenic in humans, with the strongest human evidence linking EtO exposure to lymphoid and breast cancers. Analyses of the mechanistic data establish a key role for genotoxicity and mutagenicity in EtO-induced carcinogenicity and reveal little evidence supporting other mode-of-action hypotheses. In conclusion, EtO was found to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation, posing a potential human health hazard for lymphoid and breast cancers.

Combinations of genotoxic tests for the evaluation of group 1 IARC carcinogens

Many of the known human carcinogens are potent genotoxins that are efficiently detected as carcinogens in human populations but certain types of compounds such as immunosuppressants, sex hormones, etc. act via non-genotoxic mechanism. The absence of genotoxicity and the diversity of modes of action of non-genotoxic carcinogens make predicting their carcinogenic potential extremely challenging. There is evidence that combinations of different short-term tests provide a better and efficient prediction of human genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens. The purpose of this study is to summarize the in vivo and in vitro comet assay (CMT) results of group 1 carcinogens selected from the International Agency for Research on Cancer and to discuss the utility of the comet assay along with other genotoxic assays such as Ames, in vivo micronucleus (MN), and in vivo chromosomal aberration (CA) test. Of the 62 agents for which valid genotoxic data were available, 38 of 61 (62.3%) were Ames test positive, 42 of 60 (70%) were in vivo MN test positive and 36 of 45 (80%) were positive for the in vivo CA test. Higher sensitivity was seen in in vivo CMT (90%) and in vitro CMT (86.9%) assay. Combination of two tests has greater sensitivity than individual tests: in vivo MN + in vivo CA (88.6%); in vivo MN + in vivo CMT (92.5%); and in vivo MN + in vitro CMT (95.6%). Combinations of in vivo or in vitro CMT with other tests provided better sensitivity. In vivo CMT in combination with in vivo CA provided the highest sensitivity (96.7%).