Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32608486›Full record

ArticleMutagenesis2020

Pig-a gene mutation assay study design: critical assessment of 3- versus 28-day repeat-dose treatment schedules.

Azeddine Elhajouji, Tamsanqa Tafara Hove, Oliver O'Connell, Hansjoerg Martus, Stephen D Dertinger

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mutagenesis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Azeddine ElhajoujiPreclinical Safety, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, WKL-135.2.25, Basel, Switzerland.
Tamsanqa Tafara HovePreclinical Safety, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, WKL-135.2.25, Basel, Switzerland.
Oliver O'ConnellPreclinical Safety, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, WKL-135.2.25, Basel, Switzerland.
Hansjoerg MartusPreclinical Safety, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, WKL-135.2.25, Basel, Switzerland.
Stephen D DertingerLitron Laboratories, 3500 Winton Place, Rochester, NY, USA.
Novartis (Switzerland) · CHLitron Laboratories (United States) · US

Funding

Validation of a Rodent Mutagenicity AssayR44ES018017 · NIEHS · LITRON LABORATORIES, LTD. · PI DERTINGER, STEPHEN D · 2010 to 2012
$1.8M
Tools to Study Mammalian MutagenesisR44ES021973 · NIEHS · LITRON LABORATORIES, LTD. · PI BEMIS, JEFFREY C, DERTINGER, STEPHEN D · 2012 to 2014
$1.3M
NIEHS NIH HHS R44 ES018017NIEHS NIH HHS R44 ES021973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The in vivo Pig-a assay is being used in safety studies to evaluate the potential of chemicals to induce somatic cell gene mutations. Ongoing work is aimed at developing an Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) test guideline to support routine use for regulatory purposes (OECD project number 4.93). Among the details that will need to be articulated in an eventual guideline are recommended treatment and harvest schedules. With this in mind, experiments reported herein were performed with Wistar Han rats exposed to aristolochic acid I (AA), 1,3-propane sultone, chlorambucil, thiotepa or melphalan using each of two commonly used treatment schedules: 3 or 28 consecutive days. In the case of the 3-day studies, blood was collected for Pig-a analysis on days 15 or 16 and 29 or 30. For the 28-day studies blood was collected on day 29 or 30. The effect of treatment on mutant reticulocytes and mutant erythrocytes was evaluated with parametric pair-wise tests. While each of the five mutagens increased mutant phenotype cell frequencies irrespective of study design, statistical significance was consistently achieved at lower dose levels when the 28-day format was used (e.g. 2.75 vs 20 mg/kg/bw for AA). To more thoroughly investigate the dose-response relationships, benchmark dose (BMD) analyses were performed with PROAST software. These results corroborate the pair-wise testing results in that lower BMD values were obtained with the 28-day design. Finally, mutagenic potency, as measured by BMD analyses, most consistently correlated with the mutagens' tumorigenic dose 50 values when the lengthier treatment schedule was used. Collectively, these results suggest that both 3- and 28-day treatment schedules have merit in hazard identification-type studies. That being said, for the purpose of regulatory safety assessments, there are clear advantages to study designs that utilise protracted exposures.

Indexed as

MutationAnimalsAristolochic AcidsChlorambucilErythrocytesMaleMelphalanMembrane ProteinsMutagenicity TestsMutagensRatsRats, WistarReticulocytesThiophenesThiotepaTime Factors1,3-propane sultonearistolochic acid IAristolochic AcidsChlorambucilMelphalanMembrane ProteinsMutagensphosphatidylinositol glycan-class A proteinThiophenesThiotepa

Identifiers

PMID32608486
PMCPMC7486680
OpenAlexW3039833443

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.