A comparison of alternative distributions of postimplantation death in the dominant lethal assay

Recommendations for statistical designs of in vivo mutagenicity tests with regard to subsequent statistical analysis

A workshop was held on September 13 and 14, 1993, at the GSF, Neuherberg, Germany, to start a discussion of experimental design and statistical analysis issues for three in vivo mutagenicity test systems, the micronucleus test in mouse bone marrow/peripheral blood, the chromosomal aberration tests in mouse bone marrow/differentiating spermatogonia, and the mouse dominant lethal test. The discussion has now come to conclusions which we would like to make generally known. Rather than dwell upon specific statistical tests which could be used for data analysis, serious consideration was given to test design. However, the test design, its power of detecting a given increase of adverse effects and the test statistics are interrelated. Detailed analyses of historical negative control data led to important recommendations for each test system. Concerning the statistical sensitivity parameters, a type I error of 0.05 (one tailed), a type II error of 0.20 and a dose related increase of twice the background (negative control) frequencies were generally adopted. It was recommended that sufficient observations (cells, implants) be planned for each analysis unit (animal) so that at least one adverse outcome (micronucleus, aberrant cell, dead implant) would likely be observed. The treated animal was the smallest unit of analysis allowed. On the basis of these general consideration the sample size was determined for each of the three assays. A minimum of 2000 immature erythrocytes/animal should be scored for micronuclei from each of at least 4 animals in each comparison group in the micronucleus assays. A minimum of 200 cells should be scored for chromosomal aberrations from each of at least 5 animals in each comparison group in the aberration assays. In the dominant lethal test, a minimum of 400 implants (40-50 pregnant females) are required per dose group for each mating period. The analysis unit for the dominant lethal test would be the treated male unless the background frequency of dead implants (DI) is so low that multiple males would need to be integrated to meet the minimum observation of one adverse outcome (DI) per analysis unit. A three-step strategy of data analysis was proposed for the cytogenetic assays. Use of negative historical controls was allowed in certain circumstances for interpretation of results from micronucleus tests and chromosomal aberration tests.

Assessing overdispersion and dose-response in the male dominant lethal assay

In dominant lethal studies the primary variables of interest are typically expressed as discrete counts or proportions (e.g., live implants, resorptions, percent pregnant). Simple statistical sampling models for discrete data such as binomial or Poisson generally do not fit this type of data because of extra-binomial or extra-Poisson departures from variability predicted under these simple models. Extra-variability in the fetal response may originate from parental contributions. These can lead to over- or under-dispersion seen as, e.g., extra-binomial variability in the proportion response. Utilizing a large control database, we investigated the relative impact of extra-variability from male or female contributions on the endpoints of interest. Male-related effects did not seem to contribute to overdispersion in our database; female-related effects were, however, evidenced. Various statistical methods were considered to test for significant treatment differences under these forms of sampling variability. Computer simulations were used to evaluate these methods and to determine which are most appropriate for practical use in the evaluation of dominant lethal data. Our results suggest that distribution-free statistical methods such as a nonparametric permutation test or rank-based tests for trend can be recommended for use.

International Commission for Protection against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. ICPEMC Working Paper No. 15/1. Genetic effects of ethanol

Alcoholics have a higher frequency of chromosomal aberrations and sister-chromatid exchanges (SCEs) in their peripheral lymphocytes. In human and mammalian cells in vitro, ethanol generally does not induce genetic damage, but it induces SCEs in the presence of an exogenous metabolic system. In human lymphocytes in vitro, ethanol induces SCEs in the presence of alcohol dehydrogenase. In animals in vivo, ethanol induces a variety of genetic effects, including SCEs, micronuclei, dominant lethal mutations and aneuploidy in mouse eggs. There is some indication that ethanol may lead to genetic damage in sperm. In bacteria, ethanol is at best marginally active. Ethanol leads to anomalous chromosome segregation in Aspergillus, to mutations in yeast, to chromosomal aberrations and SCEs in plant root tips and to disturbances of meiosis and micronuclei in tetrads in Zea and Tradescantia respectively. The first metabolite of ethanol, acetaldehyde is mutagenic in a variety of test systems. The mutagenic activity of acetaldehyde in bacteria is questionable, but there is no doubt of its mutagenic activity in a variety of eukaryotic test systems in vitro as well as in vivo.