1
|
Fortin AMV, Long AS, Williams A, Meier MJ, Cox J, Pinsonnault C, Yauk CL, White PA. Application of a new approach methodology (NAM)-based strategy for genotoxicity assessment of data-poor compounds. FRONTIERS IN TOXICOLOGY 2023; 5:1098432. [PMID: 36756349 PMCID: PMC9899896 DOI: 10.3389/ftox.2023.1098432] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2022] [Accepted: 01/02/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
The conventional battery for genotoxicity testing is not well suited to assessing the large number of chemicals needing evaluation. Traditional in vitro tests lack throughput, provide little mechanistic information, and have poor specificity in predicting in vivo genotoxicity. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) aim to accelerate the pace of hazard assessment and reduce reliance on in vivo tests that are time-consuming and resource-intensive. As such, high-throughput transcriptomic and flow cytometry-based assays have been developed for modernized in vitro genotoxicity assessment. This includes: the TGx-DDI transcriptomic biomarker (i.e., 64-gene expression signature to identify DNA damage-inducing (DDI) substances), the MicroFlow® assay (i.e., a flow cytometry-based micronucleus (MN) test), and the MultiFlow® assay (i.e., a multiplexed flow cytometry-based reporter assay that yields mode of action (MoA) information). The objective of this study was to investigate the utility of the TGx-DDI transcriptomic biomarker, multiplexed with the MicroFlow® and MultiFlow® assays, as an integrated NAM-based testing strategy for screening data-poor compounds prioritized by Health Canada's New Substances Assessment and Control Bureau. Human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells were exposed to 3 control and 10 data-poor substances, using a 6-point concentration range. Gene expression profiling was conducted using the targeted TempO-Seq™ assay, and the TGx-DDI classifier was applied to the dataset. Classifications were compared with those based on the MicroFlow® and MultiFlow® assays. Benchmark Concentration (BMC) modeling was used for potency ranking. The results of the integrated hazard calls indicate that five of the data-poor compounds were genotoxic in vitro, causing DNA damage via a clastogenic MoA, and one via a pan-genotoxic MoA. Two compounds were likely irrelevant positives in the MN test; two are considered possibly genotoxic causing DNA damage via an ambiguous MoA. BMC modeling revealed nearly identical potency rankings for each assay. This ranking was maintained when all endpoint BMCs were converted into a single score using the Toxicological Prioritization (ToxPi) approach. Overall, this study contributes to the establishment of a modernized approach for effective genotoxicity assessment and chemical prioritization for further regulatory scrutiny. We conclude that the integration of TGx-DDI, MicroFlow®, and MultiFlow® endpoints is an effective NAM-based strategy for genotoxicity assessment of data-poor compounds.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne-Marie V. Fortin
- Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada,Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Alexandra S. Long
- Existing Substances Risk Assessment Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Andrew Williams
- Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Matthew J. Meier
- Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Julie Cox
- Bureau of Gastroenterology, Infection and Viral Diseases, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Claire Pinsonnault
- New Substances Assessment and Control Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Carole L. Yauk
- Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada,*Correspondence: Carole L. Yauk, ; Paul A. White,
| | - Paul A. White
- Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada,Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada,*Correspondence: Carole L. Yauk, ; Paul A. White,
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Le Goff A, Louvel S, Boullier H, Allard P. Toxicoepigenetics for Risk Assessment: Bridging the Gap Between Basic and Regulatory Science. Epigenet Insights 2022; 15:25168657221113149. [PMID: 35860623 PMCID: PMC9290111 DOI: 10.1177/25168657221113149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2022] [Accepted: 06/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Toxicoepigenetics examines the health effects of environmental exposure associated with, or mediated by, changes in the epigenome. Despite high expectations, toxicoepigenomic data and methods have yet to become significantly utilized in chemical risk assessment. This article draws on a social science framework to highlight hitherto overlooked structural barriers to the incorporation of toxicoepigenetics in risk assessment and to propose ways forward. The present barriers stem not only from the lack of maturity of the field but also from differences in constraints and standards between the data produced by toxicoepigenetics and the regulatory science data that risk assessment processes require. Criteria and strategies that frame the validation of knowledge used for regulatory purposes limit the application of basic research in toxicoepigenetics toward risk assessment. First, the need in regulatory toxicology for standardized methods that form a consensus between regulatory agencies, basic research, and the industry conflicts with the wealth of heterogeneous data in toxicoepigenetics. Second, molecular epigenetic data do not readily translate into typical toxicological endpoints. Third, toxicoepigenetics investigates new forms of toxicity, in particular low-dose and long-term effects, that do not align well with the traditional framework of regulatory toxicology. We propose that increasing the usefulness of epigenetic data for risk assessment will require deliberate efforts on the part of the toxicoepigenetics community in 4 areas: fostering the understanding of epigenetics among risk assessors, developing knowledge infrastructure to demonstrate applicability, facilitating the normalization and exchange of data, and opening the field to other stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Le Goff
- The Institute for Society and Genetics and The EpiCenter, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Séverine Louvel
- Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Sciences Po Grenoble, PACTE, Grenoble, France and Institut Universitaire de France, Paris, France
| | - Henri Boullier
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, IRISSO, Université Paris-Dauphine-PSL, Paris, France
| | - Patrick Allard
- The Institute for Society and Genetics and The EpiCenter, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Molecular Biology Institute, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Christopher Corton J, Mitchell CA, Auerbach S, Bushel JP, Ellinger-Ziegelbauer H, Escobar PA, Froetschl R, Harrill AH, Johnson K, Klaunig JE, Pandiri AR, Podtelezhnikov AA, Rager JE, Tanis KQ, van der Laan JW, Vespa A, Yauk CL, Pettit SD, Sistare FD. A Collaborative Initiative to Establish Genomic Biomarkers for Assessing Tumorigenic Potential to Reduce Reliance on Conventional Rodent Carcinogenicity Studies. Toxicol Sci 2022; 188:4-16. [PMID: 35404422 PMCID: PMC9238304 DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfac041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
There is growing recognition across broad sectors of the scientific community that use of genomic biomarkers has the potential to reduce the need for conventional rodent carcinogenicity studies of industrial chemicals, agrochemicals, and pharmaceuticals through a weight-of-evidence approach. These biomarkers fall into 2 major categories: (1) sets of gene transcripts that can identify distinct tumorigenic mechanisms of action; and (2) cancer driver gene mutations indicative of rapidly expanding growth-advantaged clonal cell populations. This call-to-action article describes a collaborative approach launched to develop and qualify biomarker gene expression panels that measure widely accepted molecular pathways linked to tumorigenesis and their activation levels to predict tumorigenic doses of chemicals from short-term exposures. Growing evidence suggests that application of such biomarker panels in short-term exposure rodent studies can identify both tumorigenic hazard and tumorigenic activation levels for chemical-induced carcinogenicity. In the future, this approach will be expanded to include methodologies examining mutations in key cancer driver gene mutation hotspots as biomarkers of both genotoxic and nongenotoxic chemical tumor risk. Analytical, technical, and biological validation studies of these complementary genomic tools are being undertaken by multisector and multidisciplinary collaborative teams within the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute. Success from these efforts will facilitate the transition from current heavy reliance on conventional 2-year rodent carcinogenicity studies to more rapid animal- and resource-sparing approaches for mechanism-based carcinogenicity evaluation supporting internal and regulatory decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Christopher Corton
- Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | | | - Scott Auerbach
- Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - J Pierre Bushel
- Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Patricia A Escobar
- Safety Assessment and Laboratory Animal Resources, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, West Point, PA, USA
| | - Roland Froetschl
- BfArM-Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, Bonn, Germany
| | - Alison H Harrill
- Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | | | - James E Klaunig
- Laboratory of Investigative Toxicology and Pathology, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Indiana School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
| | - Arun R Pandiri
- Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | | | - Julia E Rager
- The Institute for Environmental Health Solutions, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Keith Q Tanis
- Safety Assessment and Laboratory Animal Resources, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, West Point, PA, USA
| | - Jan Willem van der Laan
- Section on Pharmacology, Toxicology and Kinetics, Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Alisa Vespa
- Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Carole L Yauk
- Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Syril D Pettit
- Health and Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Frank D Sistare
- Division of Pharmacotherapy and Experimental Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bhuller Y, Ramsingh D, Beal M, Kulkarni S, Gagne M, Barton-Maclaren TS. Canadian Regulatory Perspective on Next Generation Risk Assessments for Pest Control Products and Industrial Chemicals. FRONTIERS IN TOXICOLOGY 2022; 3:748406. [PMID: 35295100 PMCID: PMC8915837 DOI: 10.3389/ftox.2021.748406] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Accepted: 10/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
In 2012, the Council of Canadian Academies published the expert panel on integrated testing of pesticide’s report titled: Integrating emerging technologies into chemical safety assessment. This report was prepared for the Government of Canada in response to a request from the Minister of Health and on behalf of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency. It examined the scientific status of the use of integrated testing strategies for the regulatory health risk assessment of pesticides while noting the data-rich/poor dichotomy that exists when comparing pesticide formulations to most industrial chemicals. It also noted that the adoption of integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA) strategies may refine and streamline testing of chemicals, as well as improve results in the future. Moreover, the experts expected to see an increase in the use of integrated testing strategies over the next decade, resulting in improved evidence-based decision-making. Subsequent to this report, there has been great advancements in IATA strategies, which includes the incorporation of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) and new approach methodologies (NAMs). This perspective provides the first Canadian regulatory update on how Health Canada is also advancing the incorporation of alternative, non-animal strategies, using a weight of evidence approach, for the evaluation of pest control products and industrial chemicals. It will include specific initiatives and describe how this work is leading to the creation of next generation risk assessments. It also reflects Health Canada’s commitment towards implementing the 3Rs of animal testing: reduce, refine and replace the need for animal studies, whenever possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yadvinder Bhuller
- Health Evaluation Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Deborah Ramsingh
- Health Evaluation Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Marc Beal
- Safe Environments Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Sunil Kulkarni
- Safe Environments Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Matthew Gagne
- Safe Environments Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Tara S Barton-Maclaren
- Safe Environments Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Transcriptomics in Toxicogenomics, Part I: Experimental Design, Technologies, Publicly Available Data, and Regulatory Aspects. NANOMATERIALS 2020; 10:nano10040750. [PMID: 32326418 PMCID: PMC7221878 DOI: 10.3390/nano10040750] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2020] [Revised: 04/02/2020] [Accepted: 04/03/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
The starting point of successful hazard assessment is the generation of unbiased and trustworthy data. Conventional toxicity testing deals with extensive observations of phenotypic endpoints in vivo and complementing in vitro models. The increasing development of novel materials and chemical compounds dictates the need for a better understanding of the molecular changes occurring in exposed biological systems. Transcriptomics enables the exploration of organisms' responses to environmental, chemical, and physical agents by observing the molecular alterations in more detail. Toxicogenomics integrates classical toxicology with omics assays, thus allowing the characterization of the mechanism of action (MOA) of chemical compounds, novel small molecules, and engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). Lack of standardization in data generation and analysis currently hampers the full exploitation of toxicogenomics-based evidence in risk assessment. To fill this gap, TGx methods need to take into account appropriate experimental design and possible pitfalls in the transcriptomic analyses as well as data generation and sharing that adhere to the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) principles. In this review, we summarize the recent advancements in the design and analysis of DNA microarray, RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq), and single-cell RNA-Seq (scRNA-Seq) data. We provide guidelines on exposure time, dose and complex endpoint selection, sample quality considerations and sample randomization. Furthermore, we summarize publicly available data resources and highlight applications of TGx data to understand and predict chemical toxicity potential. Additionally, we discuss the efforts to implement TGx into regulatory decision making to promote alternative methods for risk assessment and to support the 3R (reduction, refinement, and replacement) concept. This review is the first part of a three-article series on Transcriptomics in Toxicogenomics. These initial considerations on Experimental Design, Technologies, Publicly Available Data, Regulatory Aspects, are the starting point for further rigorous and reliable data preprocessing and modeling, described in the second and third part of the review series.
Collapse
|
6
|
Yauk CL, Harrill AH, Ellinger-Ziegelbauer H, van der Laan JW, Moggs J, Froetschl R, Sistare F, Pettit S. A cross-sector call to improve carcinogenicity risk assessment through use of genomic methodologies. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2020; 110:104526. [PMID: 31726190 PMCID: PMC7891877 DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.104526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2019] [Revised: 09/25/2019] [Accepted: 11/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Robust genomic approaches are now available to realize improvements in efficiencies and translational relevance of cancer risk assessments for drugs and chemicals. Mechanistic and pathway data generated via genomics provide opportunities to advance beyond historical reliance on apical endpoints of uncertain human relevance. Published research and regulatory evaluations include many examples for which genomic data have been applied to address cancer risk assessment as a health protection endpoint. The alignment of mature, robust, reproducible, and affordable technologies with increasing demands for reduced animal testing sets the stage for this important transition. We present our shared vision for change from leading scientists from academic, government, nonprofit, and industrial sectors and chemical and pharmaceutical safety applications. This call to action builds upon a 2017 workshop on "Advances and Roadblocks for Use of Genomics in Cancer Risk Assessment." The authors propose a path for implementation of innovative cancer risk assessment including incorporating genomic signatures to assess mechanistic relevance of carcinogenicity and enhanced use of genomics in benchmark dose and point of departure evaluations. Novel opportunities for the chemical and pharmaceutical sectors to combine expertise, resources, and objectives to achieve a common goal of improved human health protection are identified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alison H Harrill
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle, Park, NC, 27709, USA.
| | | | | | | | - Roland Froetschl
- BfArM Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Bonn, Germany
| | | | - Syril Pettit
- Health and Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
A bioinformatics workflow for the evaluation of RT-qPCR primer specificity: Application for the assessment of gene expression data reliability in toxicological studies. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2020; 111:104575. [PMID: 31945455 DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104575] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2019] [Accepted: 01/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
The reliability of Reverse Transcription quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) gene expression data depends on proper primer design and RNA quality controls. Despite freely available genomic databases and bioinformatics tools, primer design deficiencies can be found across life science publications. In order to assess the prevalence of such deficiencies in the toxicological literature, 504 primer sets extracted from a random selection of 70 recent rat toxicological studies were evaluated. The specificity of each primer set was systematically analysed using a bioinformatics workflow developed from publicly available resources (NCBI Primer BLAST, in silico PCR in UCSC genome browser, Ensembl DNA database). Potential mismatches (9%), cross-matches (13.5%), co-amplification of multiple gene splice variants (9%) and sub-optimal amplicon sizes (25%) were identified for a significant proportion of the primer sets assessed in silico. Quality controls for gDNA contamination of RNA samples were infrequently reported in the surveyed manuscripts. Hence, the impacts of gDNA contamination on RT-qPCR data were further investigated, revealing that lowly expressed genes presented higher susceptibility to contaminating gDNA. In addition to the retrospective identification of potential primer design issues presented in this study, the described bioinformatics workflow can also be used prospectively to select candidate primer sets for experimental validation.
Collapse
|
8
|
Krewski D, Andersen ME, Tyshenko MG, Krishnan K, Hartung T, Boekelheide K, Wambaugh JF, Jones D, Whelan M, Thomas R, Yauk C, Barton-Maclaren T, Cote I. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: progress in the past decade and future perspectives. Arch Toxicol 2019; 94:1-58. [DOI: 10.1007/s00204-019-02613-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 124] [Impact Index Per Article: 24.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2019] [Accepted: 11/05/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
|