通过 DNA 加合物分析开发遗传毒性/致癌性评估方法

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Kohei Watanabe , Masami Komiya , Asuka Obikane , Tsubasa Miyazaki , Kousuke Ishino , Keita Ikegami , Hiroki Hashizume , Yukako Ishitsuka , Takashi Fukui , Min Gi , Shugo Suzuki , Hideki Wanibuchi , Yukari Totsuka
{"title":"通过 DNA 加合物分析开发遗传毒性/致癌性评估方法","authors":"Kohei Watanabe ,&nbsp;Masami Komiya ,&nbsp;Asuka Obikane ,&nbsp;Tsubasa Miyazaki ,&nbsp;Kousuke Ishino ,&nbsp;Keita Ikegami ,&nbsp;Hiroki Hashizume ,&nbsp;Yukako Ishitsuka ,&nbsp;Takashi Fukui ,&nbsp;Min Gi ,&nbsp;Shugo Suzuki ,&nbsp;Hideki Wanibuchi ,&nbsp;Yukari Totsuka","doi":"10.1016/j.mrgentox.2024.503821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Safety evaluation is essential for the development of chemical substances. Since <em>in vivo</em> safety evaluation tests, such as carcinogenesis tests, require long-term observation using large numbers of experimental animals, it is necessary to develop alternative methods that can predict genotoxicity/carcinogenicity in the short term, taking into account the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement). We established a prediction model of the hepatotoxicity of chemicals using a DNA adductome, which is a comprehensive analysis of DNA adducts that may be used as an indicator of DNA damage in the liver. An adductome was generated with LC-high-resolution accurate mass spectrometer (HRAM) on liver of rats exposed to various chemicals for 24 h, based on two independent experimental protocols. The resulting adductome dataset obtained from each independent experiment (experiments 1 and 2) and integrated dataset were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and found to correctly classify the chemicals into the following four categories: non-genotoxic/non-hepatocarcinogens (−/−), genotoxic/non-hepatocarcinogens (+/−), non-genotoxic/hepatocarcinogens (−/+), and genotoxic/hepatocarcinogens (+/+), based on their genotoxicity/carcinogenicity properties. A prototype model for predicting the genotoxicity/carcinogenicity of the chemicals was established using machine learning methods (using random forest algorithm). When the prototype genotoxicity/carcinogenicity prediction model was used to make predictions for experiments 1 and 2 as well as the integrated dataset, the correct response rates were 89 % (genotoxicity), 94 % (carcinogenicity) and 87 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for experiment 1, 47 % (genotoxicity), 62 % (carcinogenicity) and 42 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for experiment 2, and 52 % (genotoxicity), 62 % (carcinogenicity), and 48 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for the integrated dataset. To improve the accuracy of the toxicity prediction model, the toxicity label was reconstructed as follows; Pattern 1: when +/+ and −/− chemicals were used from the toxicity labels +/+, +/−, −/+ and −/−; and Pattern 2: when +/+, +/−, and −/+ other than −/− were replaced with the label \"Others\". As a result, chemicals with only +/+ and −/− toxicity labels were used and the correct response rates were approximately 100 % for the measured data in experiment 1, 53 %–66 % for the data in experiment 2, and 59–73 % for the integrated data, all of which were 10 %–30 % higher compared with the data before the label change. In contrast, when the toxicity labels were replaced with −/− and “Others”, they reached nearly 100 % in the measured data from experiment 1, 65 %–75 % in the data from experiment 2, and 70 %–78 % in the integrated data, all of which were 10 %–50 % higher compared with the data before the label change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":18799,"journal":{"name":"Mutation research. Genetic toxicology and environmental mutagenesis","volume":"899 ","pages":"Article 503821"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of a genotoxicity/carcinogenicity assessment method by DNA adductome analysis\",\"authors\":\"Kohei Watanabe ,&nbsp;Masami Komiya ,&nbsp;Asuka Obikane ,&nbsp;Tsubasa Miyazaki ,&nbsp;Kousuke Ishino ,&nbsp;Keita Ikegami ,&nbsp;Hiroki Hashizume ,&nbsp;Yukako Ishitsuka ,&nbsp;Takashi Fukui ,&nbsp;Min Gi ,&nbsp;Shugo Suzuki ,&nbsp;Hideki Wanibuchi ,&nbsp;Yukari Totsuka\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.mrgentox.2024.503821\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Safety evaluation is essential for the development of chemical substances. Since <em>in vivo</em> safety evaluation tests, such as carcinogenesis tests, require long-term observation using large numbers of experimental animals, it is necessary to develop alternative methods that can predict genotoxicity/carcinogenicity in the short term, taking into account the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement). We established a prediction model of the hepatotoxicity of chemicals using a DNA adductome, which is a comprehensive analysis of DNA adducts that may be used as an indicator of DNA damage in the liver. An adductome was generated with LC-high-resolution accurate mass spectrometer (HRAM) on liver of rats exposed to various chemicals for 24 h, based on two independent experimental protocols. The resulting adductome dataset obtained from each independent experiment (experiments 1 and 2) and integrated dataset were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and found to correctly classify the chemicals into the following four categories: non-genotoxic/non-hepatocarcinogens (−/−), genotoxic/non-hepatocarcinogens (+/−), non-genotoxic/hepatocarcinogens (−/+), and genotoxic/hepatocarcinogens (+/+), based on their genotoxicity/carcinogenicity properties. A prototype model for predicting the genotoxicity/carcinogenicity of the chemicals was established using machine learning methods (using random forest algorithm). When the prototype genotoxicity/carcinogenicity prediction model was used to make predictions for experiments 1 and 2 as well as the integrated dataset, the correct response rates were 89 % (genotoxicity), 94 % (carcinogenicity) and 87 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for experiment 1, 47 % (genotoxicity), 62 % (carcinogenicity) and 42 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for experiment 2, and 52 % (genotoxicity), 62 % (carcinogenicity), and 48 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for the integrated dataset. To improve the accuracy of the toxicity prediction model, the toxicity label was reconstructed as follows; Pattern 1: when +/+ and −/− chemicals were used from the toxicity labels +/+, +/−, −/+ and −/−; and Pattern 2: when +/+, +/−, and −/+ other than −/− were replaced with the label \\\"Others\\\". As a result, chemicals with only +/+ and −/− toxicity labels were used and the correct response rates were approximately 100 % for the measured data in experiment 1, 53 %–66 % for the data in experiment 2, and 59–73 % for the integrated data, all of which were 10 %–30 % higher compared with the data before the label change. In contrast, when the toxicity labels were replaced with −/− and “Others”, they reached nearly 100 % in the measured data from experiment 1, 65 %–75 % in the data from experiment 2, and 70 %–78 % in the integrated data, all of which were 10 %–50 % higher compared with the data before the label change.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mutation research. Genetic toxicology and environmental mutagenesis\",\"volume\":\"899 \",\"pages\":\"Article 503821\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mutation research. Genetic toxicology and environmental mutagenesis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1383571824000974\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mutation research. Genetic toxicology and environmental mutagenesis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1383571824000974","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

安全评估对化学物质的开发至关重要。由于致癌试验等体内安全性评价试验需要使用大量实验动物进行长期观察,因此有必要开发可在短期内预测遗传毒性/致癌性的替代方法,同时考虑到 3R(替换、还原和完善)。我们利用 DNA 加合物组建立了一个化学品肝毒性预测模型,DNA 加合物组是对 DNA 加合物的综合分析,可用作肝脏 DNA 损伤的指标。根据两个独立的实验方案,利用液相色谱-高分辨精确质谱仪(HRAM)生成了暴露于各种化学物质 24 小时的大鼠肝脏的加合物组。通过线性判别分析(LDA)对每个独立实验(实验 1 和实验 2)产生的加合物数据集和综合数据集进行分析,发现可以正确地将化学品分为以下四类:非基因毒性/非肝癌致癌物 (-/-)、基因毒性/非肝癌致癌物 (+/-)、非基因毒性/肝癌致癌物 (-/+) 和基因毒性/肝癌致癌物 (+/+)。利用机器学习方法(随机森林算法)建立了预测化学品遗传毒性/致癌性的原型模型。使用原型遗传毒性/致癌性预测模型对实验 1 和 2 以及综合数据集进行预测时,实验 1 的正确反应率分别为 89%(遗传毒性)、94%(致癌性)和 87%(遗传毒性/致癌性)、实验 2 的正确率分别为 47%(基因毒性)、62%(致癌性)和 42%(基因毒性/致癌性),而综合数据集的正确率分别为 52%(基因毒性)、62%(致癌性)和 48%(基因毒性/致癌性)。为了提高毒性预测模型的准确性,对毒性标签进行了如下重构:模式 1:使用 +/+、+/-、-/+ 和 -/- 毒性标签的化学品;模式 2:将 +/+、+/- 和 -/- 以外的 -/+ 替换为 "其他 "标签。因此,只使用+/+和-/-毒性标签的化学品,实验 1 中测量数据的正确回答率约为 100%,实验 2 中数据的正确回答率约为 53%-66%,综合数据的正确回答率约为 59%-73%,均比更换标签前的数据高出 10%-30%。相反,当毒性标签换成-/-和 "其他 "时,实验 1 的测量数据几乎达到 100%,实验 2 的数据达到 65%-75%,综合数据达到 70%-78%,这些数据都比更换标签前的数据高出 10%-50%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of a genotoxicity/carcinogenicity assessment method by DNA adductome analysis

Safety evaluation is essential for the development of chemical substances. Since in vivo safety evaluation tests, such as carcinogenesis tests, require long-term observation using large numbers of experimental animals, it is necessary to develop alternative methods that can predict genotoxicity/carcinogenicity in the short term, taking into account the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement). We established a prediction model of the hepatotoxicity of chemicals using a DNA adductome, which is a comprehensive analysis of DNA adducts that may be used as an indicator of DNA damage in the liver. An adductome was generated with LC-high-resolution accurate mass spectrometer (HRAM) on liver of rats exposed to various chemicals for 24 h, based on two independent experimental protocols. The resulting adductome dataset obtained from each independent experiment (experiments 1 and 2) and integrated dataset were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and found to correctly classify the chemicals into the following four categories: non-genotoxic/non-hepatocarcinogens (−/−), genotoxic/non-hepatocarcinogens (+/−), non-genotoxic/hepatocarcinogens (−/+), and genotoxic/hepatocarcinogens (+/+), based on their genotoxicity/carcinogenicity properties. A prototype model for predicting the genotoxicity/carcinogenicity of the chemicals was established using machine learning methods (using random forest algorithm). When the prototype genotoxicity/carcinogenicity prediction model was used to make predictions for experiments 1 and 2 as well as the integrated dataset, the correct response rates were 89 % (genotoxicity), 94 % (carcinogenicity) and 87 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for experiment 1, 47 % (genotoxicity), 62 % (carcinogenicity) and 42 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for experiment 2, and 52 % (genotoxicity), 62 % (carcinogenicity), and 48 % (genotoxicity/carcinogenicity) for the integrated dataset. To improve the accuracy of the toxicity prediction model, the toxicity label was reconstructed as follows; Pattern 1: when +/+ and −/− chemicals were used from the toxicity labels +/+, +/−, −/+ and −/−; and Pattern 2: when +/+, +/−, and −/+ other than −/− were replaced with the label "Others". As a result, chemicals with only +/+ and −/− toxicity labels were used and the correct response rates were approximately 100 % for the measured data in experiment 1, 53 %–66 % for the data in experiment 2, and 59–73 % for the integrated data, all of which were 10 %–30 % higher compared with the data before the label change. In contrast, when the toxicity labels were replaced with −/− and “Others”, they reached nearly 100 % in the measured data from experiment 1, 65 %–75 % in the data from experiment 2, and 70 %–78 % in the integrated data, all of which were 10 %–50 % higher compared with the data before the label change.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
84
审稿时长
105 days
期刊介绍: Mutation Research - Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis (MRGTEM) publishes papers advancing knowledge in the field of genetic toxicology. Papers are welcomed in the following areas: New developments in genotoxicity testing of chemical agents (e.g. improvements in methodology of assay systems and interpretation of results). Alternatives to and refinement of the use of animals in genotoxicity testing. Nano-genotoxicology, the study of genotoxicity hazards and risks related to novel man-made nanomaterials. Studies of epigenetic changes in relation to genotoxic effects. The use of structure-activity relationships in predicting genotoxic effects. The isolation and chemical characterization of novel environmental mutagens. The measurement of genotoxic effects in human populations, when accompanied by quantitative measurements of environmental or occupational exposures. The application of novel technologies for assessing the hazard and risks associated with genotoxic substances (e.g. OMICS or other high-throughput approaches to genotoxicity testing). MRGTEM is now accepting submissions for a new section of the journal: Current Topics in Genotoxicity Testing, that will be dedicated to the discussion of current issues relating to design, interpretation and strategic use of genotoxicity tests. This section is envisaged to include discussions relating to the development of new international testing guidelines, but also to wider topics in the field. The evaluation of contrasting or opposing viewpoints is welcomed as long as the presentation is in accordance with the journal''s aims, scope, and policies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信