Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis
Genotoxicity screening via the γH2AX by flow assay
Highlights
► Development of “γH2AX by flow” genotoxicity screening assay that incorporates bioactivation capability, providing scope for detection of both pro- and proximate genotoxins. ► High predictivity (sensitivity, specificity and concordance) of the γH2AX by flow assay with respect to the in vitro genetic toxicology test battery, i.e. Ames and mammalian assays such as mouse lymphoma and chromosome aberrations assays. ► High content nature of assay provides capability to determine atypical genotoxic effects as illustrated by γH2AX response to simple aniline chemicals.
Introduction
Genetic toxicology assessment represents a front-line safety tool in chemical and pharmaceutical development. Positive results in one or more of the core tests in the standard battery, typically bacterial mutagenesis, in vitro mammalian genotoxicity assays and in vivo bone marrow cytogenetic assessment can have significant implications for development. In addition, many chemical synthesis intermediates, degradation products and impurities may also require testing and therefore the development of new technologies for the reliable and accurate assessment of genotoxic potential is required [1], [2], [3]. To this end, several rapid and high-throughput assays have been developed that claim to be predictive of the core genetic toxicology test battery [4], [5].
Measurement of serine-139-phosphorylated histone H2AX (defined as γH2AX) using flow cytometry technology is an emerging assay for the detection of genotoxic potential. The assay is mechanistically-underpinned by the knowledge that γH2AX facilitates the repair of clastogenic DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and is an integral component in the DNA damage response machinery of mammalian cells [6]. Indeed, h2ax gene “knock-out” mice exhibit both radiosensitivity and broad genomic instability, thus illustrating the physiological importance of H2AX protein as a tumour suppressor [7]. Flow cytometry assessment of γH2AX is particularly appealing because of the high-content nature of the technology; genotoxic “signatures” consisting of DNA damage response and cell cycle information are readily elucidated, whilst compound requirements are relatively low and data acquisition is both rapid and of higher-throughput compared to standard mammalian genotoxicity assays, such as the mouse lymphoma assay (MLA) and chromosome aberration (CA) assay [8], [9].
The role of γH2AX was first elucidated around a decade ago and since then researchers have endeavoured to use it as a biological tool to study in situ DNA damage, specifically DSBs, in a number of contexts. γH2AX expression has been utilised as a biodosimeter for ionising radiation exposure, a surrogate of cell killing and also as a means to monitor both clinical progress and inform on disease prognosis in an oncology setting [10], [11], [12]. This expanding body of data appears to reflect the promise of γH2AX as a biomarker of DSBs and potential genotoxic stress.
In the present pilot study, γH2AX levels were used as a surrogate for DNA damage and evaluated in L5178Y cells exposed to a variety of chemicals with well-characterised genotoxic potential in standard Ames bacterial mutagenesis and in vitro mammalian genotoxicity tests, i.e. MLA and CA assay (see Table 1), mainly from the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) list [13]. Two assay “arms” were conducted; 3h +S9 and 24h −S9 treatment regimens were used in this study to mimic the in vitro mammalian assay screening strategy used at GlaxoSmithKline, where experience to date indicates that 3h −S9 unique positives are extremely rare (<0.5%; data not shown). To define evaluation criteria for this novel approach, a validation set of chemicals consisting of 6 prototypical genotoxins (+S9: DMBA, 2-AAF and B[a]P; −S9: MMS, MNU and 4-NQO) and 3 non-genotoxic cytotoxins (±S9: phthalic anhydride, n-butyl chloride and hexachloroethane) were analysed initially, followed by the remaining 25 chemicals. Results of the γH2AX by flow assay are presented and discussed in terms of their concordance with standard in vitro genotoxicity assays (Ames and in vitro mammalian genotoxicity tests).
Section snippets
Cell culture and treatment
Mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells (tk+/−) were maintained in exponential growth phase in “complete” RPMI 1640 medium (GIBCO, UK), i.e. supplemented with heat-inactivated donor horse serum (10% v/v; Biosera, UK), penicillin (50 U/ml; GIBCO), streptomycin (50 μg/ml; GIBCO), l-glutamine (2 mM; GIBCO), sodium pyruvate (0.5 mM; GIBCO) and pluronic F68 (0.05% v/v; GIBCO), at 37 °C in a humidified atmosphere (5% CO2).
All test compounds were of the highest purity available and purchased from Sigma–Aldrich, UK
Defining assay evaluation criteria using the validation set
The pro-genotoxins DMBA, 2-AAF and B[a]P, which require P450-mediated bioactivation to proximate genotoxins, the proximate genotoxins MMS, MNU and 4-NQO, and the non-genotoxic cytotoxins phthalic anhydride, n-butyl chloride and hexachloroethane were used to define assay evaluation criteria for the γH2AX by flow assay. Selection was based on recommended lists of genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals for performance assessment of new or improved genotoxicity tests [13].
As expected, all pro- and
Discussion
The first objective of the current study was to define robust positive evaluation criteria for the γH2AX by flow assay that would enable reliable discrimination of chemicals with genotoxic potential from non-genotoxins. As with any genetic toxicology assay, the consideration of confounding factors for assay interpretation, such as cytotoxicity, was central to the definition of the evaluation criteria of this assay [29]. To this end, a set of validation chemicals consisting of the
Conflict of interest statement
None declared.
Competing interests
The authors are working at GlaxoSmithKline.
Funding
GlaxoSmithKline was responsible for funding of this work.
References (41)
- et al.
Practical aspects of mutagenicity testing strategy: an industrial perspective
Mutat. Res.
(2000) - et al.
Evaluation of high-throughput genotoxicity assays used in profiling the US EPA ToxCast™ chemicals
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmcol.
(2009) - et al.
Evaluation of the Vitotox and RadarScreen assays for the rapid assessment of genotoxicity in the early research phase of drug development
Mutat. Res.
(2009) Genotoxicity of topoisomerase II inhibitors: an anti-infective perspective
Toxicology
(2008)- et al.
Recommended lists of genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals for assessment of the performance of new or improved genotoxicity tests: a follow-up to an ECVAM workshop
Mutat. Res.
(2008) - et al.
Validation and characterization of the L5178Y/TK+/− mouse lymphoma mutagen assay system
Mutat. Res.
(1979) - et al.
Locus specificity of mutagenicity of 2,4-diaminotoluene in both L5178Y mouse lymphoma and AT3-2 Chinese hamster ovary cells
Mutat. Res.
(1984) - et al.
New tester strains of Salmonella typhimurium lacking O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferases and highly sensitive to mutagenic alkylating agents
Mutat. Res.
(1997) - et al.
How to reduce false positive results when undertaking in vitro genotoxicity testing and thus avoid unnecessary follow-up animal tests: report of an ECVAM Workshop
Mutat. Res.
(2007) - et al.
Error-prone replication for better or worse
Trends Microbiol.
(2004)
Assessment of DNA double-strand breaks and gammaH2AX induced by the topoisomerase II poisons etoposide and mitoxantrone
Mutat. Res.
Evaluation of an automated in vitro micronucleus assay in CHO-K1 cells
Mutat. Res.
Activation of P53 in HepG2 cells as surrogate to detect mutagens and promutagens in vitro
Tox. Lett.
Building a tiered approach to in vitro predictive toxicity screening: a focus on assays with in vivo relevance
Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen.
The role of genetic toxicology in drug discovery and optimization
Curr. Drug Metab.
GammaH2AX and cancer
Nat. Rev. Cancer
Genomic instability in mice lacking histone H2AX
Science
Cytometric assessment of DNA damage in relation to cell cycle phase and apoptosis
Cell Prolif.
Expression of phosphorylated histone H2AX in cultured cell lines following exposure to X-rays
Int. J. Radiat. Biol.
Expression of phosphorylated histone H2AX as a surrogate of cell killing by drugs that create DNA double-strand breaks
Cancer Res.
Cited by (86)
A cathodic photoelectrochemical immunoassay with dual signal amplification for the ultrasensitive detection of DNA damage biomarkers
2023, Biosensors and BioelectronicsAnti-schistosomal activities of quinoxaline-containing compounds: From hit identification to lead optimisation
2021, European Journal of Medicinal ChemistryCitation Excerpt :Percentage of cells identified at each fluorescence channel were recorded in three independent experiments and data were then transformed as fold changes. A cut off for a negative vs a positive ɣH2AX and p53 response over the control is defined as a 1.5-fold change [30,37,39]. The MN response was considered positive based on a statistically significant response compared to that of DMSO control [78].
Phosphorylated ATM and H2AX in T and B lymphocytes from rats with moderate and severe malnutrition
2019, DNA RepairCitation Excerpt :To assess DNA damage and genomic instability, the phosphorylated H2AX (gH2AX), comet assay and MN formation assays [36] were used. The first assay (phosphorylation of H2AX using flow cytometry) has several advantages, including its specificity and high sensitivity for recognizing DSBs, even at low frequencies, compared with those of other assays ([19,37]). Exploration of DSBs has mainly been performed in cell lines [20].
Toxicological, Biochemical and Histopathological Evaluation of the Ethanolic extract of Seagrass-Enhalus acoroides in Albino wistar rats
2019, Biocatalysis and Agricultural BiotechnologyGenotoxicity of aflatoxins and their precursors in human cells
2018, Toxicology Letters