4.2 Article

Miniaturized flow cytometry-based in vitro primary human lymphocyte micronucleus assay-validation study

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL AND MOLECULAR MUTAGENESIS
卷 53, 期 4, 页码 260-270

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/em.21690

关键词

micronucleus; human lymphocytes; flow cytometry; proliferation; miniaturization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most in vitro mammalian genotoxicity assays show a low specificity (high rate of irrelevant positive results), and therefore, lead to an increase in follow-up in vivo genotoxicity testing. One of the sources of the high rate of in vitro irrelevant positive results that find no confirmation in in vivo studies may be the characteristics of the test system used. It has been shown that cells that are p53 deficient or carry an alteration in DNA repair genes may be more prone to produce high rate of false/irrelevant positive results. Primary human lymphocytes (HuLy) are considered to show a higher specificity in predicting the in vivo genotoxic potential of a tested compound. We recently developed a flow cytometry-based primary human T-lymphocyte micronucleus test (MNT) and showed that the technology is promising and reliable in detecting genotoxic compounds. The purpose of the present work was to develop and validate a miniaturized format of the assay. For validation purposes of the flow cytometry HuLy MNT a wide selection of compounds with different mechanisms of genotoxicity was used. The evaluation covered 30 compounds: 19 commercially available genotoxicants and nongenotoxicants and 11 early pharmaceutical development compounds. Being faster and less tedious than the microscopic analysis, the miniaturized flow cytometry-based methodology showed very promising results. Conveniently, cell division is verified within the same sample as the MN frequency. Moreover analysis of hypodiploid events may provide an indication for a mode of action, i.e. clastogenic versus aneugenic mechanism, for further follow-up testing. Mol. Mutagen. 2012. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据