Report from the in vitro micronucleus assay working group.

UNLABELLED: At the Washington "2nd International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing" (25-26 March 1999) current methodologies and data for the in vitro micronucleus test were reviewed. As a result, guidelines for the conduct of specific aspects of the protocol were developed. Agreement was achieved on the following topics: choice of cells, slide preparation, analysis of micronuclei, toxicity, use of cytochalasin-B, number of doses, and treatment/harvest times [Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 35 (2000) 167]. Because there were a number of important in vitro micronucleus validation studies in progress, it was not possible to design a definitive, internationally harmonized protocol at that time. These studies have now been completed and the data were reviewed at the Plymouth "3rd International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing" (28-29 June 2002). Data from studies coordinated by the French Society of Genetic Toxicology, Japanese collaborative studies, European pharmaceutical industry validation studies, along with data from Lilly Research Laboratories were used to prepare conclusions on the main aspects of the in vitro micronucleus protocol. In this paper, the consensus agreements on the protocol for performing the in vitro micronucleus assay are presented. The major recommendations concern: 1. Demonstration of cell proliferation: both cell lines and lymphocytes can be used, but demonstration of cell proliferation in both control and treated cells is compulsory for the acceptance of the test. 2. Assessment of toxicity and dose range finding: assessment of toxicity should be performed by determining cell proliferation, e.g. increased cell counts (CC) or population doubling (PD) without cytochalasin-B, or e.g. cytokinesis-block proliferation index with cytochalasin-B; and by determining other markers for cytotoxicity (confluency, apoptosis, necrosis) which can provide valuable additional information. 3. Treatment schedules for cell lines and lymphocytes. 4. Choice of positive controls: without S9-mix both a clastogen (e.g. mitomycin C or bleomycin) and an aneugen (e.g. colchicine) should be included as positive controls and a clastogen that requires S9 for activity when S9-mix is used (e.g. dimethylnitrosamine, or cyclophosphamide in those cell types that cannot activate this agent directly). 5. Duplicate cultures and number of cells to be scored. 6. Repeat experiments: in lymphocytes, for each experiment blood from 2 different healthy young and non-smoking donors should be compared. In cell lines, the experiments need only to be repeated if the first one is negative. 7. STATISTICS: statistical significance should not be the sole factor for determining positive results. Biological meaning should serve as a guideline. Examples of statistical analyses are given.

Indirect mechanisms of genotoxicity.

Indirect mechanisms of genotoxicity correspond to interactions of mutagens with non-DNA targets, and are expected to show threshold concentration-effect response curves. If these thresholds can be proven experimentally they may provide a third alternative for risk assessment, besides the No Effect Level/Safety Factor approach and the low dose linear extrapolation method. We contributed significantly to the in vitro assessment of thresholds in human lymphocytes exposed to the spindle inhibitors nocodazole and carbendazim showing dose dependency and existence of lower thresholds for induction of non-disjunction as compared to chromosome loss. Micronuclei correlated with p53-independent or p53-dependent apoptosis and elimination of aneuploid cells. Extrapolation from in vitro threshold values to the in vivo situation remains unsolved. Comparing the in vitro threshold values for griseofulvin in human and rat lymphocytes with in vivo NOAEL/LOAEL in bone marrow/gut/erythrocytes suggests that the in vitro human system is the most sensitive. The threshold for induction of non-disjunction in in vitro maturing, nocodazole-exposed mouse oocytes was in the same low range. Regulators (UK Committee on Mutagenicity, http://www.doh.gov.uk/com/com.htm) considered the importance of thresholds for indirect mechanisms of genotoxicity. Acceptance of a non-linear extrapolation for mutagens requires mechanistic studies identifying the mutagen/target interactions. Moreover appropriate risk evaluation will require additional studies on individual susceptibility for indirect mutagenic effects and on interactions of aneugens in complex mixtures.

Importance of detecting numerical versus structural chromosome aberrations.

The aim is to review briefly the key questions related to aneuploidy/polyploidy and to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the in vitro micronucleus test to assess aneuploidy/polyploidy in vitro. The key questions that will be addressed, concern the importance of polyploidy for health, and cancer in particular, the mechanisms leading to aneuploidy and polyploidy, and the survival of aneuploid/polyploid cells. The recently recognised contribution of numerical chromosome changes to carcinogenesis triggered the development and the implementation of tests specifically aiming at the detection of aneugens in the test battery for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity. The validation of the in vitro micronucleus test in combination with the identification of in vitro divided cells with the cytokinesis-block methodology and of centromeres with pancentromeric or chromosome specific centromeric probes fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) provides a sensitive, easy to score and powerful test which allows assessment of cell proliferation, the discrimination between chromosome breaks, chromosome loss and chromosome non-disjunction and polyploidy. Moreover, classic histology permits the estimation of necrosis and apoptosis on the same slide. The cytokinesis-blocked micronucleus assay could be considered as a multi-endpoint test for genotoxic responses to clastogens/aneugens. This methodology has also shown to be capable of identifying threshold values for the induction of chromosome loss and/or non-disjunction by microtubule inhibitors, data which are particularly important for risk calculations. Similar approaches were conducted in vivo on bone marrow in mice and rats (except for identification of chromosome non-disjunction), and are in development for gut in mice.