Effects of ovariectomy, estrogen and pregnancy on mammalian hair color.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to D Clive.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The present analysis examines the assumptions in, the perceptions and predictivity of and the need for short-term tests (STTs) for genotoxicity in light of recent findings that most noncarcinogens from the National Toxicology Program are genotoxic (i.e., positive in one or more in vitro STTs). Reasonable assumptions about the prevalence for carcinogens (1-10% of all chemicals), the sensitivity of these STTs (ca. 90% of all carcinogens are genotoxic) and their estimated "false positive" incidence (60-75%) imply that the majority of chemicals elicit genotoxic responses and, consequently, that most in vitro genotoxins are likely to be noncarcinogenic. Thus, either the usual treatment conditions used in these in vitro STTS are producing a large proportion of artifactual and meaningless positive results or else in vitro mutagenicity is too common a property of chemicals to serve as a useful predictor of carcinogenicity or other human risk. In contrast, the limited data base on in vivo STTs suggests that the current versions of these assays may have low sensitivity which appears unlikely to improve without dropping either their 'short-term' aspect or the rodent carcinogenicity benchmark. It is suggested that in vivo genotoxicity protocols be modified to take into consideration both the fundamentals of toxicology as well as the lessons learned from in vitro genetic toxicology. In the meantime, while in vivo assays are undergoing rigorous validation, genetic toxicology, as currently practiced, should not be a formal aspect of chemical or drug development on the grounds that it is incapable of providing realistic and reliable information on human risk. It is urged that data generated in new, unvalidated in vivo genotoxicity assays be exempted from the normal regulatory reporting requirements in order to encourage industry to participate in the laborious and expensive development of this next phase of genetic toxicology.
Acyclovir (ACV), an antiviral drug active in the treatment of oral and genital Herpes infections, has been evaluated for mutagenic and carcinogenic potential in a battery of in vitro and in vivo short-term assays. Negative results were obtained in the following in vitro tests: Ames Salmonella, plate incorporation and preincubation modification assays; E. coli polA+/polA- DNA repair; yeast (S. cerevisiae D4) gene conversion; Chinese hamster ovary cells (HGPRT, APRT loci and ouabain-resistance marker); L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells (HGPRT locus and ouabain-resistance marker); and C3H/10T1/2 mouse fibroblast neoplastic transformation assay. All except the last assay were performed in the presence and absence of an exogenous metabolic activation system. ACV was positive at high concentrations X exposure times in the absence of exogenous metabolic activation in the following in vitro systems and at the indicated concentrations: BALB/c-3T3 neoplastic transformation (50 micrograms/mL, 72 h exposure); human lymphocyte cytogenetics (250-500 micrograms/mL, 48 h exposure); and L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells (TK locus, 400-2400 micrograms/mL, 4 h exposure; predominantly small colony mutants of chromosomal origin produced). No effects were seen in vivo (mouse dominant lethal assay; rat and Chinese hamster bone marrow cytogenetics) at up to maximum tolerated doses (MTD). An unusual clastogenic effect was seen in Chinese hamsters at 5 times the MTD. Overall, positive effects were seen only at either high concentrations (greater than or equal to 250 micrograms/mL in vitro or plasma levels) or prolonged exposure (72 hr in the BALB/c-3T3 neoplastic transformation assay). These studies support the view that ACV is a chromosomal mutagen, i.e., one which causes multi-locus damage but not single gene effects. The significance of these results for the genetic risk of ACV to man is discussed.