Evaluation of lacI mutation in germ cells and micronuclei in peripheral blood after treatment of male lacI transgenic mice with ethylnitrosourea, isopropylmethane sulfonate or methylmethane sulfonate

Detection of induced male germline mutation: correlations and comparisons between traditional germline mutation assays, transgenic rodent assays and expanded simple tandem repeat instability assays

Several rodent assays are capable of monitoring germline mutation. These include traditional assays, such as the dominant lethal (DL) assay, the morphological specific locus (SL) test and the heritable translocation (HT) assay, and two assays that have been developed more recently--the expanded simple tandem repeat (ESTR) and transgenic rodent (TGR) mutation assays. In this paper, we have compiled the limited amount of experimental data that are currently available to make conclusions regarding the comparative ability of the more recently developed assays to detect germline mutations induced by chemical and radiological agents. The data suggest that ESTR and TGR assays are generally comparable with SL in detecting germline mutagenicity induced by alkylating agents and radiation, though TGR offered less sensitivity than ESTR in some cases. The DL and HT assays detect clastogenic events and are most susceptible to mutations arising in post-spermatogonial cells, and they may not provide the best comparisons with TGR and ESTR instability. The measurement of induced ESTR instability represents a relatively sensitive method of identifying agents causing germline mutation in rodents, and may also be useful for bio-monitoring exposed individuals in the human population. Any future use of the TGR and ESTR germline mutation assays in a regulatory testing context will entail more robust and extensive characterization of assay performance. This will require substantially more data, including experiments measuring multiple endpoints, a greatly expanded database of chemical agents and a focus on characterizing stage-specific activity of mutagens in these assays, preferably by sampling epididymal sperm exposed at defined pre-meiotic, meiotic and post-meiotic stages of development.

Detailed review of transgenic rodent mutation assays

Induced chromosomal and gene mutations play a role in carcinogenesis and may be involved in the production of birth defects and other disease conditions. While it is widely accepted that in vivo mutation assays are more relevant to the human condition than are in vitro assays, our ability to evaluate mutagenesis in vivo in a broad range of tissues has historically been quite limited. The development of transgenic rodent (TGR) mutation models has given us the ability to detect, quantify, and sequence mutations in a range of somatic and germ cells. This document provides a comprehensive review of the TGR mutation assay literature and assesses the potential use of these assays in a regulatory context. The information is arranged as follows. (1) TGR mutagenicity models and their use for the analysis of gene and chromosomal mutation are fully described. (2) The principles underlying current OECD tests for the assessment of genotoxicity in vitro and in vivo, and also nontransgenic assays available for assessment of gene mutation, are described. (3) All available information pertaining to the conduct of TGR assays and important parameters of assay performance have been tabulated and analyzed. (4) The performance of TGR assays, both in isolation and as part of a battery of in vitro and in vivo short-term genotoxicity tests, in predicting carcinogenicity is described. (5) Recommendations are made regarding the experimental parameters for TGR assays, and the use of TGR assays in a regulatory context.

Mutagenicity testing with transgenic mice. Part II: Comparison with the mouse spot test

The mouse spot test, an in vivo mutation assay, has been used to assess a number of chemicals. It is at present the only in vivo mammalian test system capable of detecting somatic gene mutations according to OECD guidelines (OECD guideline 484). It is however rather insensitive, animal consuming and expensive type of test. More recently several assays using transgenic animals have been developed. From data in the literature, the present study compares the results of in vivo testing of over twenty chemicals using the mouse spot test and compares them with results from the two transgenic mouse models with the best data base available, the lacI model (commercially available as the Big Blue(R) mouse), and the lacZ model (commercially available as the Mutatrade mark Mouse). There was agreement in the results from the majority of substances. No differences were found in the predictability of the transgenic animal assays and the mouse spot test for carcinogenicity. However, from the limited data available, it seems that the transgenic mouse assay has several advantages over the mouse spot test and may be a suitable test system replacing the mouse spot test for detection of gene but not chromosome mutations in vivo.

Mutagenicity testing with transgenic mice. Part I: Comparison with the mouse bone marrow micronucleus test

As part of a larger literature study on transgenic animals in mutagenicity testing, test results from the transgenic mutagenicity assays (lacI model; commercially available as the Big Blue(R) mouse, and the lacZ model; commercially available as the Mutatrade markMouse), were compared with the results on the same substances in the more traditional mouse bone marrow micronucleus test. 39 substances were found which had been tested in the micronucleus assay and in the above transgenic mouse systems. Although, the transgenic animal mutation assay is not directly comparable with the micronucleus test, because different genetic endpoints are examined: chromosome aberration versus gene mutation, the results for the majority of substances were in agreement. Both test systems, the transgenic mouse assay and the mouse bone marrow micronucleus test, have advantages and they complement each other. However, the transgenic animal assay has some distinct advantages over the micronucleus test: it is not restricted to one target organ and detects systemic as well as local mutagenic effects.