WP 6 In vivo genotoxicity

Similar documents
Maria João Silva H. Louro 1, T. Borges 2, J. Lavinha 1, J.M. Albuquerque 1

SolNanoTox. How the solubility of nanoparticles impacts on their behaviour and their potential toxicity? Valérie FESSARD

Genotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area

The Comet Assay Tails of the (Un)expected

ACRYLAMIDE - EU Summary of Activities

Risk Communication Towards a sustainable working life Forum on new and emerging OSH risks Brussels, October

Genotoxicity of formaldehyde in vitro and in vivo. Günter Speit

Adapted from: Google Maps. Available at (Last accessed: September 26 th 2011)

Mugimane Manjanatha, Ph.D

R. Balansky 1,2, F. D Agostini 2, A. Izzotti 2, P. Kalpakam 3, V.E. Steele 4, S. De Flora 2

Safety of Allura Red AC in feed for cats and dogs

IMPURITIES: GUIDELINE FOR RESIDUAL SOLVENTS PDE FOR CUMENE

DISCUSSION GROUP 3. Mechanism of carcinogenicity. EFSA Scientific Colloquium on Acrylamide carcinogenicity, 22/23 May

The in vivo genotoxicity studies on nivalenol and deoxynivalenol 1

Scientific Opinion on the safety of Hostazym X as a feed additive for poultry and pigs 1

The effect of REACH implementation on genotoxicity and carcinogenicity testing Jan van Benthem

Glyphosate Hazard and Risk Assessment: A Comparison of the Approaches of Two International Agencies

Genotoxicity of 2-Hydroxy-1,4-naphthoquinone (Lawsone, CAS )

Dose-Response Data From Potency

Genotoxic and acute toxic properties of selected synthetic cannabinoids

Evaluation of genome damage in subjects occupationally exposed to possible carcinogens. D. Želježi, M. Mladini, N. Kopjar, A. Hursidic Radulovic

Antimicrobial AlphaSan Test Report Summary Table 08/21/01

Risk Assessment Report on Tris (nonylphenyl)phosphite (TNPP)

Lecture -2- Environmental Biotechnology

Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food

VICH GL23: Studies to evaluate the safety of residues of veterinary drugs in human food: genotoxicity testing

Dr. Josef Schlatter Member of the Scientific Committee and EFSA s WG on Novel Foods

Annex II. Scientific conclusions and grounds for variation to the terms of the marketing authorisations

5.17 PENTHIOPYRAD (253)

Trifluridine Ophthalmic Solution, 1% Sterile

DIBROMOACETONITRILE. 1. Exposure Data

ROS scavenging Mn 3 O 4 nanozymes for in vivo anti-inflammation

Comparison of different genotoxicity tests in vitro for assessment of surface water quality E. Dopp, J. Richard, S. Zander-Hauck

DICHLOROACETONITRILE. 1. Exposure Data

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

MANGANESE & HEALTH: A BALANCE OF STORIES

Comments CLH proposal Cadmium hydroxide

VIROPTIC Ophthalmic Solution, 1% Sterile (trifluridine ophthalmic solution)

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

Biomarkers of acrylamide

OECD/OCDE OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS. Mammalian Erythrocyte Micronucleus Test

22 nd ETH-Conference on Combustion Generated Nanoparticles June 18 21, 2018; Zürich, Switzerland. Wolfgang G. Kreyling

Principles of Toxicology: The Study of Poisons

ToxStrategies, Inc. and Summit Toxicology

EXTERNAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT

EVALUATION OF THE CHANGES RESULTING FROM TAMOXIFEN ADMINISTRATION. A COMBINED DNA FLOWCYTOMETRIC AND HISTOPATHOLOGICAL STUDY

Radiofrequency Radiation

SISTER CHROMATID EXCHANGE FREQUENCY AND CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS IN RESIDENTS OF FLUORIDE ENDEMIC REGIONS OF SOUTH GUJARAT

To: Recipients of JACC 42. HV/mls/JACC 42 corrigendum Brussels, 15 December 2004

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

5.36 THIOPHANATE-METHYL (077)

B. 12. MUTAGENICITY IN VIVO MAMMALIAN ERYTHROCYTE MICRONUCLEUS TEST

4. Other Data Relevant to an Evaluation of Carcinogenicity and its Mechanisms

EVALUATION OF CYTOTOXICITY OF DICHLORVOS PESTICIDE IN LABORATORY MOUSE

Comparison of the peripheral blood micronucleus test using flow cytometry in rat and mouse exposed to aneugens after single-dose applications

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

Proof of principle tests confirm genotoxic potential of RF-EMF

Applications of the comet assay in particle toxicology: air pollution and engineered nanomaterials exposure

Hazard Assessment of Glyphosate Carcinogenicity and Reproductive Toxicity

Read-across illustrative example

Genetic Toxicology. Toxicology for Industrial and Regulatory Scientists

EFSA Info Session on Applications. Technical meeting on food flavourings applications. Parma, 20 th January 2015

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC. Opinion proposing harmonised classification and labelling at EU level of. cobalt

General introductory remarks

The Director General Maisons-Alfort, 30 July 2018 OPINION. of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety

Dichlorvos DICHLORVOS (025)

Research Framework for Evaluating the Potential Mode(s)

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

ACTIVITY OF BRINCIDOFOVIR (BCV) AGAINST MURINE POLYOMAVIRUS (MUPYV) IN A MOUSE INFECTION MODEL

SCIENTIFIC OPINION. EFSA Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) 2, 3

EFSA working group on BPA assessment protocol. Ursula Gundert-Remy Chair of the EFSA Working Group BPA assessment Protocol

Health effects of intermediate frequency magnetic fields

EU assessment of the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

The potential impact of toxicogenomics on modern chemical risk assessment 3-MCPD and 3-MCPD fatty acid esters as examples

David B. Warheit Ph.D, Chemours Company, Wilmington, Delaware USA

Viroptic (trifluridine) solution [Monarch Pharmaceuticals, Inc.]

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC. Opinion proposing harmonised classification and labelling at EU level of. acetaldehyde; ethanal

Genomic DNA Isolation Kit (Blood/Cultured Cell/Fungus)

An updated review of the genotoxicity of respirable crystalline silica

Genotoxic and carcinogenic potential of 160 mycotoxins in human cells. Dr. Audebert Marc, UMR1331 Toxalim, Toulouse, France

The carcinogenicity of benzene. The IARC Monograph Vol 120. Kurt Straif, MD MPH PhD. PSA, Stavanger, 25 October 2018

COMMITTEE FOR VETERINARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS

InhalT 90 Current Project Status

1 Institute for In Vitro Sciences, 2 The Procter & Gamble Co., 3 MatTek Corporation

TR-469 Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of AZT (CAS No ) and AZT/-Interferon A/D B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies)

Nanofibrillated cellulose: results of in vitro and in vivo toxicological assays

DANIEL R. DOERGE U.S. Food and Drug Administration National Center for Toxicological Research Jefferson, AR

Risk Assessment Report on Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (HCCP) Human Health Part. CAS No.: EINECS No.:

CVMP assessment report regarding the request for an opinion under Article 30(3) of Regulation (EC) No. 726/2004

Risk Assessment Report on styrene. Human Health Part

Evaluation of genotoxicity of gastric proton pump inhibitor omeprazole and role of vitamin-e in mice

DRAFT for public consultation. Reflection on interpretation of some aspects related to genotoxicity assessment. EFSA Scientific Committee:

Development of fructo-oligasaccharide (FOS) dietary supplement from plants for elders and digestive disorder patients

(Z)-1-Chloro-2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (2017)

Genomic DNA Isolation Reagent Kit (Blood/Cultured Cell/Tissue)

Nanoparticles and persistent virus infection a dangerous liaison for the development of chronic lung disease(s)? Tobias Stöger

Maximum Residue Limits for Clinacox 0.5% (diclazuril) for turkeys for fattening, chickens for fattening and chickens reared for laying 1

The Toxicology of Nanoparticles

Transcription:

WP 6 In vivo genotoxicity Valérie Fessard Anses Fougères France valerie.fessard@anses.fr NANOGENOTOX Final conference 22 February 2013

WP6 partners 9 partners from 7 countries

Aims Determine the in vivo genotoxicity of MNs (TiO2, SAS and CNT) Comparison in vitro/in vivo /(Physicchem) March 2010 March 2011 Oct 2011 March 2012 Feb 2013 M 1 M 20 M 24 M 12 M 36 WP 6

Methodology Genotoxicity: 3 complementary tests Comet assay (early DNA damage) on rats Micronucleus assay (chromosome and genome mutations) on rats Mutation Lac Z assay (gene mutations) on mice Comet and micronucleus tests coupled to reduce the number of animals for ethical point of view

Methodology Inflammation and oxidative stress: Broncho alveolar cells count Histology Modified comet assay with FpG enzyme for selective detection of oxidative lesions; some lipid peroxidation measurements in plasma

Methodology 2 routes of exposure: gavage and instillation, some iv data also (NM102, 103, 104 and 203) 4 MNs per type (4 SAS, 4 TiO 2 and 4 CNT) Chemical positive control

Various organs both in site of contact and systemic ones Gavage and instillation, 3 doses, 3 administrations each 24h Micronucleus assay 3 to 6 h after the last administration 4 to 5 animals/dose Comet assay Bone marrow (OECD 474) Chisquare test Colon (only for gavage) lung, BAL, liver, spleen, blood, bone marrow, kidney, intestine, colon Non parametric KruskallWallis test

Methodology Training and trials organized before the assays with MNs For the micronucleus assays on bone marrow and colon About positive control: which unique chemical? which dose? What about a nanosized one? MMS and CPA Carbon black

Gavage Comet assay Lung BAL Blood Liver Spleen Bone Intestine Colon marrow Kidney MNA bone marrow MNA colon MMS ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + CPA nd nd + + toxic + CB (µg/kg) 250 nd nd + 1250 nd nd + + 2500 nd nd + + MMS 100 mg/kg (x3) except for BAL and lung (25 mg/kg x3) CPA 40 mg/kg (X3) MMS selected for chemical positive control Carbon Black not included

Methodology Doses selected (from the dispersion protocol and the WP7 results): TiO2: 4.6, 2.3 and 1.15 mg/kg (x3) instillation 26, 13.5, 6.5 mg/kg (x3) gavage 2.3 mg/animal (X5) NM103 and 104 intravenous (WP7) 10 and 15 mg/kg (x2) NM102 intravenous (LacZ) SAS: 12, 6 and 3 mg/kg (x3) instillation 20, 10 and 5 mg/kg (x3) gavage and NM203 intravenous CNT: 51.2, 25.6 and 12.8 mg/kg (x 3) for gavage except for NM400 (12.8, 6.4, 3.2 mg/kg (x3)) 0.4, 0.2 and 0.1 mg/kg (x3) for instillation except for NM402 (1.6, 0.8 and 0.4 mg/kg (x3))

Results TiO2 Comet assay: Most MNs inducing no DNA damage irrespective of the organ except after instillation NM105 in BAL and after gavage in spleen, intestine (NM103), colon (NM102 and 104) and bone marrow (NM104) Genotoxic effect observed in organs depending on the route (BAL for instillation; spleen and GI tract for gavage)

Comet assay: instillation and gavage with TiO2 BAL ++ ++ INTESTINE

Comet assay: instillation and gavage with TiO2 LIVER instillation (+) (+) +++ (+) +++ + SPLEEN gavage

Results TiO2 MN assays: No mutagenicity in bone marrow after instillation, gavage or iv Lac Z (iv administration with NM102 ): no genotoxicity in spleen and liver (comet) no clastogenicity in blood (micronucleus) no mutagenicity in liver (lac Z mutation)

Lac Z assay iv with NM102 Assay Peripheral Blood Liver Spleen Micronucleus* NEGATIVE Not done Not done Comet** Not done NEGATIVE NEGATIVE LacZ mutation*** Not done NEGATIVE Under analysis TEM Not done Under analysis Not done Histopathology Not done To be done Not done * Chisquare test; positive control was increased (P<0.0001) ** KruskallWallis test; positive control was increased in liver (P=0.008) *** KruskallWallis test; positive control was increased in liver (P=0.032)

Results SAS Comet assay: No DNA damage irrespective of the organ and the route of administration (instillation, gavage and iv for NM203)

Comet assay: instillation, gavage and IV with SAS BAL instillation/iv COLON

Comet assay: instillation, gavage and IV with SAS LIVER instillation/iv LIVER gavage

Results SAS Micronucleus assay: Bone marrow: no induction of micronuclei irrespective of the route of administration except after iv with NM 203 at the high dose (but no dose response, small increase as well as animal toxicity) Colon: increase of micronuclei formation for NM202 and 203 only at the lowest dose

Micronucleus frequency in 1000 cells Micronucleus frequency in 1000 cells Micronucleus frequency in 1000 cells Micronucleus frequency in 1000 cells Grant agreement number 2009 21 01 Colon micronucleus assay with SAS NM200 NM201 5 5 4 ** 4 ** 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 5 10 20 MMS SAS concentration in mg/kg 0 0 5 10 20 MMS SAS concentration in mg/kg 5 NM202 *** 5 NM203 *** 4 3 2 1 * NM 203: No alteration noticed from 3 histological observation 2 in colon samples 4 1 * 0 0 0 5 10 20 MMS SAS concentration in mg/kg 0 5 10 20 MMS SAS concentration in mg/kg MMS: 2 first doses 100 mg/kg, the 3rd 80 mg/kg * For p 0.05; ** for p 0.01 and *** for p 0.001 with χ² test with Yate s correction

Results CNT Comet assay: Some genotoxicity induced in various organs After gavage NM401 in liver and kidney After instillation, depending on the NP, in kidney, spleen, lung and BAL

Comet assay: instillation and gavage with CNT BAL ND + (+) ID COLON

Comet assay: instillation and gavage with CNT KIDNEY instillation ++ + ID (+) KIDNEY gavage

Results CNT Micronucleus assay: Bone marrow: no mutagenicity irrespective of the route of administration Colon: no mutagenicity with NRCWE 006

Results Intra and inter laboratory variabilities Variabilities due to the assay leading in few cases to invalidated data and inconclusive results Provide some criteria of acceptability for the nonoecd tests (EFSA 2012)

Results Not much effect from oxidative damage due to MN exposure when it had been measured by the modified Fpg comet assay Some toxicity observed: death after iv exposure with NM203 (2/5; 20 mg/kg) diarrhea after gavage with NM105 (3/5; 26 mg/kg) Some data still expected (especially micronucleus on colon) Comparison with in vitro and physchem to be performed

Conclusions Most data indicating no genotoxicity However some genotoxic effect observed in few organs that need to be confirmed, few dose response Apparently, within the same family, the toxic effect varies according to the MN (genotoxicity but also toxic injuries) Negative results with the OECD guideline 474 on bone marrow (except after iv with NM 203 at the high dose) Use of nonoecd tests which would require to set up some criteria of acceptability because some variability from lab to lab highlighted Comparison with the other WP results

WP6 comments of external experts Laetitia Gonzalez, Micheline KirschVolders Vrije Universiteit Brussel NANOGENOTOX Final conference 22 February 2013

Strengths Comparison of 3 exposure routes (it instillation, iv injection, gavage) Use of two complementary assays Comet assay MN assay Collaborative experiments with clear protocols Training Critical assessment of the results Weaknesses Tissue type choice after specific route of exposure (e.g. bone marrow after gavage or it instillation) Acceptability criteria and historical controls

Recommendations for future research Focus on relevant organs depending on route of exposure Colon after gavage Bone marrow after iv injection (OECD validated) Epithelial lung cells after it instillation Validation of in vivo genotoxicity assays in colon and lung cells