English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Conflicting results between bacterial mutagenicity tests (the Ames test) and mammalian carcinogenicity tests might be due to species differences in metabolism, genome structure, and DNA repair systems. Mutagenicity assays using human cells are thought to be an advantage as follow-up studies for positive results in Ames tests. In this collaborative study, a thymidine kinase gene mutation study (TK6 assay) using human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells, established in OECD TG490, was used to examine 10 chemicals that have conflicting results in mutagenicity studies (a positive Ames test and a negative result in rodent carcinogenicity studies).    Results  Two of 10 test substances were negative in the overall judgment (20% effective as a follow-up test). Three of these eight positive substances were negative after the short-term treatment and positive after the 24 h treatment, despite identical treatment conditions without S9. A toxicoproteomic analysis of TK6 cells treated with 4-nitroanthranilic acid was thus used to aid the interpretation of the test results. This analysis using differentially expressed proteins after the 24 h treatment indicated that in vitro specific oxidative stress is involved in false positive response in the TK6 assay.    Conclusions  The usefulness of the TK6 assay, by current methods that have not been combined with new technologies such as proteomics, was found to be limited as a follow-up test, although it still may help to reduce some false positive results (20%) in Ames tests. Thus, the combination analysis with toxicoproteomics may be useful for interpreting false positive results raised by 24 h specific reactions in the assay, resulting in the more reduction (> 20%) of false positives in Ames test.    Supplementary Information  The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41021-021-00179-1.

genes and environment

Weight of evidence approach using a TK gene mutation assay with human TK6 cells for follow-up of positive results in Ames tests: a collaborative study by MMS/JEMS