[Notion of threshold in mutagenesis: implications for mutagenic and carcinogenic risk assessment]. 2007

D Marzin
Institut Pasteur de Lille, 1, rue du Pr Calmette, BP 245, F 59019, Lille Cedex, France. daniel.marzin@pasteur-lille.fr

During years, it has been widely admitted in the scientific community that there was no threshold in mutagenesis: a compound was or not a mutagen. The meaning of such a proposition was that a risk existed at all exposure level, because, at least theoretically, one molecule is sufficient to cause the formation of a DNA adduct which is able to induce a mutation. However, works carried out in the last few years have shown that in the case of some specific mechanisms of mutagenesis, a threshold could be demonstrated essentially in the case of compounds that do not react directly with DNA. Several types of thresholds exist, and the simple statistical threshold is not sufficient in terms of risk assessment. A biological threshold that is consistent with a mechanism of action of the mutagen should be established. Amongst these mechanisms, we can mention some mechanism with a demonstrated threshold: effects of aneugens, effects of topoisomerases inhibitors, effects of DNA polymerases inhibitors, effects of compounds with a different metabolism at high doses compared to low doses. On the contrary, for some mechanisms, the demonstration of the mechanism is suspected, but not totally demonstrated. It is the case of compounds which induce nucleotides pool imbalance or compounds which are DNA repair inhibitors. In some cases, when a redundancy exists in the repair of damages, like oxidative DNA damage, a threshold is suspected. Some authors even recently proposed the possibility of a threshold in the case of alkylating agents. The majority of mutagenic thresholds were demonstrated in vitro, however some mechanisms were demonstrated in vivo, for example in the case of micronucleus induction by hypo or hyperthermia in rodents bone marrow. The use of threshold in risk assessment requires the use of the most sensitive endpoint for example, non disjunction in the case of aneugens, confusing factors like apoptosis should be eliminated and species sensitivities should be taken into account. A very important point to consider is to demonstrate that the mechanism with threshold was really thee only one involved in the mutagenic effect. The demonstration of such thresholds is of particular interest for human risk assessment in the case of mutagens and of genotoxic carcinogens.

UI MeSH Term Description Entries
D009152 Mutagenicity Tests Tests of chemical substances and physical agents for mutagenic potential. They include microbial, insect, mammalian cell, and whole animal tests. Genetic Toxicity Tests,Genotoxicity Tests,Mutagen Screening,Tests, Genetic Toxicity,Toxicity Tests, Genetic,Genetic Toxicity Test,Genotoxicity Test,Mutagen Screenings,Mutagenicity Test,Screening, Mutagen,Screenings, Mutagen,Test, Genotoxicity,Tests, Genotoxicity,Toxicity Test, Genetic
D009153 Mutagens Chemical agents that increase the rate of genetic mutation by interfering with the function of nucleic acids. A clastogen is a specific mutagen that causes breaks in chromosomes. Clastogen,Clastogens,Genotoxin,Genotoxins,Mutagen
D002273 Carcinogens Substances that increase the risk of NEOPLASMS in humans or animals. Both genotoxic chemicals, which affect DNA directly, and nongenotoxic chemicals, which induce neoplasms by other mechanism, are included. Carcinogen,Oncogen,Oncogens,Tumor Initiator,Tumor Initiators,Tumor Promoter,Tumor Promoters,Initiator, Tumor,Initiators, Tumor,Promoter, Tumor,Promoters, Tumor
D006801 Humans Members of the species Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens,Man (Taxonomy),Human,Man, Modern,Modern Man
D015197 Carcinogenicity Tests Tests to experimentally measure the tumor-producing/cancer cell-producing potency of an agent by administering the agent (e.g., benzanthracenes) and observing the quantity of tumors or the cell transformation developed over a given period of time. The carcinogenicity value is usually measured as milligrams of agent administered per tumor developed. Though this test differs from the DNA-repair and bacterial microsome MUTAGENICITY TESTS, researchers often attempt to correlate the finding of carcinogenicity values and mutagenicity values. Tumorigenicity Tests,Carcinogen Tests,Carcinogenesis Tests,Carcinogenic Activity Tests,Carcinogenic Potency Tests,Carcinogen Test,Carcinogenesis Test,Carcinogenic Activity Test,Carcinogenic Potency Test,Carcinogenicity Test,Potency Test, Carcinogenic,Potency Tests, Carcinogenic,Test, Carcinogen,Test, Carcinogenesis,Test, Carcinogenic Activity,Test, Carcinogenic Potency,Test, Carcinogenicity,Test, Tumorigenicity,Tests, Carcinogen,Tests, Carcinogenesis,Tests, Carcinogenic Activity,Tests, Carcinogenic Potency,Tests, Carcinogenicity,Tests, Tumorigenicity,Tumorigenicity Test
D018570 Risk Assessment The qualitative or quantitative estimation of the likelihood of adverse effects that may result from exposure to specified health hazards or from the absence of beneficial influences. (Last, Dictionary of Epidemiology, 1988) Assessment, Risk,Benefit-Risk Assessment,Risk Analysis,Risk-Benefit Assessment,Health Risk Assessment,Risks and Benefits,Analysis, Risk,Assessment, Benefit-Risk,Assessment, Health Risk,Assessment, Risk-Benefit,Benefit Risk Assessment,Benefit-Risk Assessments,Benefits and Risks,Health Risk Assessments,Risk Analyses,Risk Assessment, Health,Risk Assessments,Risk Benefit Assessment,Risk-Benefit Assessments
D023381 Endpoint Determination Establishment of the level of a quantifiable effect indicative of a biologic process. The evaluation is frequently to detect the degree of toxic or therapeutic effect. Endpoint Assay,End Point Assay,End Point Determination,Assay, End Point,Assay, Endpoint,Assays, End Point,Assays, Endpoint,Determination, Endpoint,Determinations, End Point,Determinations, Endpoint,End Point Assays,End Point Determinations,Endpoint Assays,Endpoint Determinations,Point Assay, End,Point Assays, End,Point Determinations, End
Copied contents to your clipboard!