Opportunities for use of one species for longer-term toxicology testing during drug development: A cross-industry evaluation.

An international expert working group representing 37 organisations (pharmaceutical/biotechnology companies, contract research organisations, academic institutions and regulatory bodies) collaborated in a data sharing exercise to evaluate the utility of two species within regulatory general toxicology studies. Anonymised data on 172 drug candidates (92 small molecules, 46 monoclonal antibodies, 15 recombinant proteins, 13 synthetic peptides and 6 antibody-drug conjugates) were submitted by 18 organisations. The use of one or two species across molecule types, the frequency for reduction to a single species within the package of general toxicology studies, and a comparison of target organ toxicities identified in each species in both short and longer-term studies were determined. Reduction to a single species for longer-term toxicity studies, as used for the development of biologicals (ICHS6(R1) guideline) was only applied for 8/133 drug candidates, but might have been possible for more, regardless of drug modality, as similar target organ toxicity profiles were identified in the short-term studies. However, definition and harmonisation around the criteria for similarity of toxicity profiles is needed to enable wider consideration of these principles. Analysis of a more robust dataset would be required to provide clear, evidence-based recommendations for expansion of these principles to small molecules or other modalities where two species toxicity testing is currently recommended.

In vivo genotoxicity testing strategies: Report from the 7th International workshop on genotoxicity testing (IWGT).

The working group reached complete or majority agreement on many issues. Results from TGR and in vivo comet assays for 91 chemicals showed they have similar ability to detect in vivo genotoxicity per se with bacterial mutagens and Ames-positive carcinogens. TGR and comet assay results were not significantly different when compared with IARC Group 1, 2 A, and unclassified carcinogens. There were significantly more comet assay positive responses for Group 2B chemicals, and for IARC classified and unclassified carcinogens combined, which may be expected since mutation is a sub-set of genotoxicity. A liver comet assay combined with the bone marrow/blood micronucleus (MNviv) test would detect in vivo genotoxins that do not exhibit tissue-specific or site-of-contact effects, and is appropriate for routine in vivo genotoxicity testing. Generally for orally administered substances, a comet assay at only one site-of-contact GI tract tissue (stomach or duodenum/jejunum) is required. In MNviv tests, evidence of target tissue exposure can be obtained in a number of different ways, as recommended by ICH S2(R1) and EFSA (Hardy et al., 2017). Except for special cases the i.p. route is inappropriate for in vivo testing; for risk evaluations more weight should be given to data from a physiologically relevant administration route. The liver MN test is sufficiently validated for the development of an OECD guideline. However, the impact of dosing animals >6 weeks of age needs to be evaluated. The GI tract MN test shows promise but needs more validation for an OECD guideline. The Pig-a assay detects systemically available mutagens and is a valuable follow-up to in vitro positive results. A new freeze-thaw protocol provides more flexibility. Mutant reticulocyte and erythrocyte frequencies should both be determined. Preliminary data are available for the Pig-a assay in male rat germ cells which require validation including germ cell DNA mutation origin.

JaCVAM-organized international validation study of the in vivo rodent alkaline comet assay for the detection of genotoxic carcinogens: I. Summary of pre-validation study results.

The in vivo rodent alkaline comet assay (comet assay) is used internationally to investigate the in vivo genotoxic potential of test chemicals. This assay, however, has not previously been formally validated. The Japanese Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (JaCVAM), with the cooperation of the U.S. NTP Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM)/the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), and the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society/Mammalian Mutagenesis Study Group (JEMS/MMS), organized an international validation study to evaluate the reliability and relevance of the assay for identifying genotoxic carcinogens, using liver and stomach as target organs. The ultimate goal of this validation effort was to establish an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) test guideline. The purpose of the pre-validation studies (i.e., Phase 1 through 3), conducted in four or five laboratories with extensive comet assay experience, was to optimize the protocol to be used during the definitive validation study.

JaCVAM-organized international validation study of the in vivo rodent alkaline comet assay for detection of genotoxic carcinogens: II. Summary of definitive validation study results.

The in vivo rodent alkaline comet assay (comet assay) is used internationally to investigate the in vivo genotoxic potential of test chemicals. This assay, however, has not previously been formally validated. The Japanese Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (JaCVAM), with the cooperation of the U.S. NTP Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM)/the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), and the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society/Mammalian Mutagenesis Study Group (JEMS/MMS), organized an international validation study to evaluate the reliability and relevance of the assay for identifying genotoxic carcinogens, using liver and stomach as target organs. The ultimate goal of this exercise was to establish an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) test guideline. The study protocol was optimized in the pre-validation studies, and then the definitive (4th phase) validation study was conducted in two steps. In the 1st step, assay reproducibility was confirmed among laboratories using four coded reference chemicals and the positive control ethyl methanesulfonate. In the 2nd step, the predictive capability was investigated using 40 coded chemicals with known genotoxic and carcinogenic activity (i.e., genotoxic carcinogens, genotoxic non-carcinogens, non-genotoxic carcinogens, and non-genotoxic non-carcinogens). Based on the results obtained, the in vivo comet assay is concluded to be highly capable of identifying genotoxic chemicals and therefore can serve as a reliable predictor of rodent carcinogenicity.

p-Chloroaniline, t-butylhydroquinone, and methyl carbamate: Rat in vivo comet test, JaCVAM trial phase 4.2.

As part of the Japanese Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (JaCVAM)-initiative international validation study of in vivo rat alkaline comet assay, we examined p-Chloroaniline, t-butylhydroquinone, and methyl carbamate. All test materials and controls were dosed orally by gavage. p-Chloroaniline produced a statistically significant increase in the mean and median % tail intensity which was also outside of the historical control range in the liver and stomach of Sprague-Dawley rats. t-Butylhydroquinone caused a statistically significant increase in the mean % tail intensity in the liver and stomach and a statistically significant increase in the median % tail intensity in the liver; however, these results are not considered to be biologically significant as all values obtained fell within the current vehicle historical control range and within the negative control range for mean % tail intensity set by the Validation Management Team (VMT) as a requirement for an acceptable assay. Methyl carbamate did not induce a statistically significant change in the mean or median % tail intensity in either liver or stomach.

Critical issues with the in vivo comet assay: A report of the comet assay working group in the 6th International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT).

As a part of the 6th IWGT, an expert working group on the comet assay evaluated critical topics related to the use of the in vivo comet assay in regulatory genotoxicity testing. The areas covered were: identification of the domain of applicability and regulatory acceptance, identification of critical parameters of the protocol and attempts to standardize the assay, experience with combination and integration with other in vivo studies, demonstration of laboratory proficiency, sensitivity and power of the protocol used, use of different tissues, freezing of samples, and choice of appropriate measures of cytotoxicity. The standard protocol detects various types of DNA lesions but it does not detect all types of DNA damage. Modifications of the standard protocol may be used to detect additional types of specific DNA damage (e.g., cross-links, bulky adducts, oxidized bases). In addition, the working group identified critical parameters that should be carefully controlled and described in detail in every published study protocol. In vivo comet assay results are more reliable if they were obtained in laboratories that have demonstrated proficiency. This includes demonstration of adequate response to vehicle controls and an adequate response to a positive control for each tissue being examined. There was a general agreement that freezing of samples is an option but more data are needed in order to establish generally accepted protocols. With regard to tissue toxicity, the working group concluded that cytotoxicity could be a confounder of comet results. It is recommended to look at multiple parameters such as histopathological observations, organ-specific clinical chemistry as well as indicators of tissue inflammation to decide whether compound-specific toxicity might influence the result. The expert working group concluded that the alkaline in vivo comet assay is a mature test for the evaluation of genotoxicity and can be recommended to regulatory agencies for use.

Maximum dose levels for the rodent comet assay to examine damage at the site of contact or to the gastrointestinal tract.

The comet assay can be applied to virtually any tissue and it has been noted that it can be particularly useful in evaluating directly acting genotoxins at their initial site of action. Consequently, it has become relatively common practice to use the stomach comet assay after oral administration to test chemicals that have given positive in vitro genotoxicity results in the absence of metabolic activation. However, to test nontoxic substances up to the limit doses of 1000/2000mg/kg formulations approaching molar concentrations must be used resulting in the stomach mucosa being exposed to excessively high levels. Evidence is beginning to accumulate which shows positive results that do not indicate that potential carcinogenicity may be associated with such high levels of exposure. For pharmaceutical agents, toxicokinetic data are usually available to demonstrate systemic exposure after oral administration. In such cases, it is proposed that exposure of any tissue to levels of the drug substance greater than those that have given positive in vitro results in the absence of metabolic activation is sufficient. However, it is recognised that toxicokinetic data are not available for all chemicals and there are also agents designed not to leave the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). Where it is necessary to examine the GIT, the dose levels selected for examination should cover the likely or intended exposure levels, not necessarily to achieve the maximum tolerated or limit doses, even if the higher doses are required for genotoxicity endpoints in other tissues to be valid. There are usually two or three dose levels in in vivo genotoxicity studies, so when both systemically exposed tissues and the stomach are being examined, it would be possible to use one of the lower doses for the latter without increasing the numbers of animals required. It is important to consider the local concentrations achieved in the stomach or other parts of the GIT in order to avoid the comet assay generating artefactual positive results and it is hoped this will be addressed in the imminent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development guideline.

The in vitro and in vivo comet assays.

The strategy for testing for genotoxicity covers three main areas, namely gene mutation, chromosome aberration or breakage (clastogenicity), and chromosome loss or gain (aneuploidy). The current generalized strategy consists of assays capable of detecting all of these endpoints using in vitro assays such as the Ames test for detecting gene mutations in bacteria, the human peripheral lymphocyte chromosome aberration (CA) test for detecting clastogenicity, and the in vitro micronucleus test for clastogenicity and aneuploidy. The primary in vivo assay, and generally the only in vivo assay required, is the in vivo rodent bone marrow micronucleus assay. However, there are instances when these assays alone are inadequate and further testing is required, especially in vivo. Historically, the preferred second assay has been the rodent liver unscheduled DNA synthesis assay but recently this has been superseded by the rodent single cell gel electrophoresis or Comet assay. This assay has numerous advantages especially in vivo, where virtually any tissue can be examined. The status of the in vitro comet assay in regulatory testing is much less clear although a preliminary review of data from the assay has shown it to be more specific than other in vitro genotoxicity tests and less prone to false positives.Detailed here are general protocols for both the in vitro and in vivo comet assays which will form the basis of the pending OECD guideline for the assay.

Improvement of in vivo genotoxicity assessment: combination of acute tests and integration into standard toxicity testing.

A working group convened at the 2009 5th IWGT to discuss possibilities for improving in vivo genotoxicity assessment by investigating possible links to standard toxicity testing. The working group considered: (1) combination of acute micronucleus (MN) and Comet assays into a single study, (2) integration of MN assays into repeated-dose toxicity (RDT) studies, (3) integration of Comet assays into RDT studies, and (4) requirements for the top dose when integrating genotoxicity measurements into RDT studies. The working group reviewed current requirements for in vivo genotoxicity testing of different chemical product classes and identified opportunities for combination and integration of genotoxicity endpoints for each class. The combination of the acute in vivo MN and Comet assays was considered by the working group to represent a technically feasible and scientifically acceptable alternative to conducting independent assays. Two combination protocols, consisting of either a 3- or a 4-treament protocol, were considered equally acceptable. As the integration of MN assays into RDT studies had already been discussed in detail in previous IWGT meetings, the working group focussed on factors that could affect the results of the integrated MN assay, such as the possible effects of repeated bleeding and the need for early harvests. The working group reached the consensus that repeated bleeding at reasonable volumes is not a critical confounding factor for the MN assay in rats older than 9 weeks of age and that rats bled for toxicokinetic investigations or for other routine toxicological purposes can be used for MN analysis. The working group considered the available data as insufficient to conclude that there is a need for an early sampling point for MN analysis in RDT studies, in addition to the routine determination at terminal sacrifice. Specific scenarios were identified where an additional early sampling can have advantages, e.g., for compounds that exert toxic effects on hematopoiesis, including some aneugens. For the integration of Comet assays into RDT studies, the working group reached the consensus that, based upon the limited amount of data available, integration is scientifically acceptable and that the liver Comet assay can complement the MN assay in blood or bone marrow in detecting in vivo genotoxins. Practical issues need to be considered when conducting an integrated Comet assay study. Freezing of tissue samples for later Comet assay analysis could alleviate logistical problems. However, the working group concluded that freezing of tissue samples can presently not be recommended for routine use, although it was noted that results from some laboratories look promising. Another discussion topic centred around the question as to whether tissue toxicity, which is more likely observed in RDT than in acute toxicity studies, would affect the results of the Comet assay. Based on the available data from in vivo studies, the working group concluded that there are no clear examples where cytotoxicity, by itself, generates increases or decreases in DNA migration. The working group identified the need for a refined guidance on the use and interpretation of cytotoxicity methods used in the Comet assay, as the different methods used generally lead to inconsistent conclusions. Since top doses in RDT studies often are limited by toxicity that occurs only after several doses, the working group discussed whether the sensitivity of integrated genotoxicity studies is reduced under these circumstances. For compounds for which in vitro genotoxicity studies yielded negative results, the working group reached the consensus that integration of in vivo genotoxicity endpoints (typically the MN assay) into RDT studies is generally acceptable. If in vitro genotoxicity results are unavailable or positive, consensus was reached that the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is acceptable as the top dose in RDT studies in many cases, such as when the RDT study MTD or exposure is close (50% or greater) to an acute study MTD or exposure. Finally, the group agreed that exceptions to this general rule might be acceptable, for example when human exposure is lower than the preclinical exposure by a large margin.

Mouse lymphoma thymidine kinase gene mutation assay: meeting of the International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing, San Francisco, 2005, recommendations for 24-h treatment.

The Mouse Lymphoma Assay (MLA) Workgroup of the International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT), comprised of experts from Japan, Europe and the United States, met on September 9, 2005, in San Francisco, CA, USA. This meeting of the MLA Workgroup was devoted to reaching a consensus on issues involved with 24-h treatment. Recommendations were made concerning the acceptable values for the negative/solvent control (mutant frequency, cloning efficiency and suspension growth) and the criteria to define an acceptable positive control response. Consensus was also reached concerning the use of the global evaluation factor (GEF) and appropriate statistical trend analysis to define positive and negative responses for the 24-h treatment. The Workgroup agreed to continue their support of the International Committee on Harmonization (ICH) recommendation that the MLA assay should include a 24-h treatment (without S-9) in those situations where the short treatment (3-4 h) gives negative results.

Fourth International Workgroup on Genotoxicity testing: results of the in vivo Comet assay workgroup.

As part of the Fourth International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT), held 9-10 September 2005 in San Francisco, California, an expert working group on the Comet assay was convened to review and discuss some of the procedures and methods recommended in previous documents. Particular attention was directed at the in vivo rodent, alkaline (pH >13) version of the assay. The aim was to review those protocol areas which were unclear or which required more detail in order to produce a standardized protocol with maximum acceptability by international regulatory agencies. The areas covered were: number of dose levels required, cell isolation techniques, measures of cytotoxicity, scoring of comets (i.e., manually or by image analysis), and the need for historical negative/positive control data. It was decided that a single limit dose was not sufficient although the required number of dose levels was not stipulated. The method of isolating cells was thought not to have a qualitative effect on the assay but more data were needed before a conclusion could be drawn. Concurrent measures of cytotoxicity were required with histopathological examination of tissues for necrosis or apoptosis as the "Gold Standard". As for analysing the comets, the consensus was that image analysis was preferred but not required. Finally, the minimal number of studies required to generate a historical positive or negative control database was not defined; rather the emphasis was placed on demonstrating the stability of the negative/positive control data. It was also agreed that a minimum reporting standard would be developed which would be consistent with OECD in vivo genotoxicity test method guidelines.

Mouse lymphoma thymidine kinase gene mutation assay: follow-up meeting of the International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing--Aberdeen, Scotland, 2003--Assay acceptance criteria, positive controls, and data evaluation.

The Mouse Lymphoma Assay (MLA) Workgroup of the International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT), comprised of experts from Japan, Europe, and the United States, met on August 29, 2003, in Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom. This meeting of the MLA Workgroup was devoted to reaching a consensus on the appropriate approach to data evaluation and on acceptance criteria for both the positive and negative/vehicle controls. The Workgroup reached consensus on the acceptance criteria for both the agar and microwell versions of the MLA. Recommendations include acceptable ranges for mutant frequency, cloning efficiency, and suspension growth of the negative/vehicle controls and on criteria to define an acceptable positive control response. The recommendation for the determination of a positive/negative test chemical response includes both the requirement that the response exceeds a defined value [the global evaluation factor (GEF)] and that there also be a positive dose-response (evaluated by an appropriate statistical method).

Comparison of the computer programs DEREK and TOPKAT to predict bacterial mutagenicity. Deductive Estimate of Risk from Existing Knowledge. Toxicity Prediction by Komputer Assisted Technology.

The performance of two computer programs, DEREK and TOPKAT, was examined with regard to predicting the outcome of the Ames bacterial mutagenicity assay. The results of over 400 Ames tests conducted at Glaxo Wellcome (now GlaxoSmithKline) during the last 15 years on a wide variety of chemical classes were compared with the mutagenicity predictions of both computer programs. DEREK was considered concordant with the Ames assay if (i) the Ames assay was negative (not mutagenic) and no structural alerts for mutagenicity were identified or (ii) the Ames assay was positive (mutagenic) and at least one structural alert was identified. Conversely, the DEREK output was considered discordant if (i) the Ames assay was negative and any structural alert was identified or (ii) the Ames assay was positive and no structural alert was identified. The overall concordance of the DEREK program with the Ames results was 65% and the overall discordance was 35%, based on over 400 compounds. About 23% of the test molecules were outside the permissible limits of the optimum prediction space of TOPKAT. Another 4% of the compounds were either not processable or had indeterminate mutagenicity predictions; these molecules were excluded from the TOPKAT analysis. If the TOPKAT probability was (i) > or =0.7 the molecule was predicted to be mutagenic, (ii) < or =0.3 the compound was predicted to be non-mutagenic and (iii) between 0.3 and 0.7 the prediction was considered indeterminate. From over 300 acceptable predictions, the overall TOPKAT concordance was 73% and the overall discordance was 27%. While the overall concordance of the TOPKAT program was higher than DEREK, TOPKAT fared more poorly than DEREK in the critical Ames-positive category, where 60% of the compounds were incorrectly predicted by TOPKAT as negative but were mutagenic in the Ames test. For DEREK, 54% of the Ames-positive molecules had no structural alerts and were predicted to be non-mutagenic. Alternative methods of analyzing the output of the programs to increase the accuracy with Ames-positive compounds are discussed.