In silico tools and transcriptomics analyses in the mutagenicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients: A proof-of-principle on how to add weight to the evidence

Gamze Ates, Giuseppa Raitano, Anja Heymans, Melissa Van Bossuyt, Philippe Vanparys, Birgit Mertens, Christophe Chesne, Alessandra Roncaglioni, Dimiter Milushev, Emilio Benfenati, Vera Rogiers, Tatyana Y. Doktorova

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Prior to the downstream development of chemical substances, including pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, their influence on the genetic apparatus has to be tested. Several in vitro and in vivo assays have been developed to test for genotoxicity. In a first tier, a battery of two to three in vitro tests is recommended to cover mutagenicity, clastogenicity and aneugenicity as main endpoints. This regulatory in vitro test battery is known to have a high sensitivity, which is at the expense of the specificity. The high number of false positive in vitro results leads to excessive in vivo follow-up studies. In the case of cosmetics it may even induce the ban of the particular compound since in Europe the use of experimental animals is no longer allowed for cosmetics. In this article, an alternative approach to derisk a misleading positive Ames test is explored. Hereto we first tested the performance of five existing computational tools to predict the potential mutagenicity of a data set of 132 cosmetic compounds with a known genotoxicity profile. Furthermore, we present, as a proof-of-principle, a strategy in which a combination of computational tools and mechanistic information derived from in vitro transcriptomics analyses is used to derisk a misleading positive Ames test result. Our data shows that this strategy may represent a valuable tool in a weight-of-evidence approach to further evaluate a positive outcome in an Ames test.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)453-461
Number of pages9
JournalMutagenesis
Volume31
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 1 2016

Fingerprint

Cosmetics
Computer Simulation
Weights and Measures
Mutagenicity Tests
Assays
Animals
In Vitro Techniques
Pharmaceutical Preparations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Genetics
  • Genetics(clinical)
  • Toxicology
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

Cite this

In silico tools and transcriptomics analyses in the mutagenicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients : A proof-of-principle on how to add weight to the evidence. / Ates, Gamze; Raitano, Giuseppa; Heymans, Anja; Van Bossuyt, Melissa; Vanparys, Philippe; Mertens, Birgit; Chesne, Christophe; Roncaglioni, Alessandra; Milushev, Dimiter; Benfenati, Emilio; Rogiers, Vera; Doktorova, Tatyana Y.

In: Mutagenesis, Vol. 31, No. 4, 01.07.2016, p. 453-461.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ates, G, Raitano, G, Heymans, A, Van Bossuyt, M, Vanparys, P, Mertens, B, Chesne, C, Roncaglioni, A, Milushev, D, Benfenati, E, Rogiers, V & Doktorova, TY 2016, 'In silico tools and transcriptomics analyses in the mutagenicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients: A proof-of-principle on how to add weight to the evidence', Mutagenesis, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 453-461. https://doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gew008
Ates, Gamze ; Raitano, Giuseppa ; Heymans, Anja ; Van Bossuyt, Melissa ; Vanparys, Philippe ; Mertens, Birgit ; Chesne, Christophe ; Roncaglioni, Alessandra ; Milushev, Dimiter ; Benfenati, Emilio ; Rogiers, Vera ; Doktorova, Tatyana Y. / In silico tools and transcriptomics analyses in the mutagenicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients : A proof-of-principle on how to add weight to the evidence. In: Mutagenesis. 2016 ; Vol. 31, No. 4. pp. 453-461.
@article{211d01eaa29e4bc9b9716b424528dd48,
title = "In silico tools and transcriptomics analyses in the mutagenicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients: A proof-of-principle on how to add weight to the evidence",
abstract = "Prior to the downstream development of chemical substances, including pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, their influence on the genetic apparatus has to be tested. Several in vitro and in vivo assays have been developed to test for genotoxicity. In a first tier, a battery of two to three in vitro tests is recommended to cover mutagenicity, clastogenicity and aneugenicity as main endpoints. This regulatory in vitro test battery is known to have a high sensitivity, which is at the expense of the specificity. The high number of false positive in vitro results leads to excessive in vivo follow-up studies. In the case of cosmetics it may even induce the ban of the particular compound since in Europe the use of experimental animals is no longer allowed for cosmetics. In this article, an alternative approach to derisk a misleading positive Ames test is explored. Hereto we first tested the performance of five existing computational tools to predict the potential mutagenicity of a data set of 132 cosmetic compounds with a known genotoxicity profile. Furthermore, we present, as a proof-of-principle, a strategy in which a combination of computational tools and mechanistic information derived from in vitro transcriptomics analyses is used to derisk a misleading positive Ames test result. Our data shows that this strategy may represent a valuable tool in a weight-of-evidence approach to further evaluate a positive outcome in an Ames test.",
author = "Gamze Ates and Giuseppa Raitano and Anja Heymans and {Van Bossuyt}, Melissa and Philippe Vanparys and Birgit Mertens and Christophe Chesne and Alessandra Roncaglioni and Dimiter Milushev and Emilio Benfenati and Vera Rogiers and Doktorova, {Tatyana Y.}",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/mutage/gew008",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "453--461",
journal = "Mutagenesis",
issn = "0267-8357",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In silico tools and transcriptomics analyses in the mutagenicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients

T2 - A proof-of-principle on how to add weight to the evidence

AU - Ates, Gamze

AU - Raitano, Giuseppa

AU - Heymans, Anja

AU - Van Bossuyt, Melissa

AU - Vanparys, Philippe

AU - Mertens, Birgit

AU - Chesne, Christophe

AU - Roncaglioni, Alessandra

AU - Milushev, Dimiter

AU - Benfenati, Emilio

AU - Rogiers, Vera

AU - Doktorova, Tatyana Y.

PY - 2016/7/1

Y1 - 2016/7/1

N2 - Prior to the downstream development of chemical substances, including pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, their influence on the genetic apparatus has to be tested. Several in vitro and in vivo assays have been developed to test for genotoxicity. In a first tier, a battery of two to three in vitro tests is recommended to cover mutagenicity, clastogenicity and aneugenicity as main endpoints. This regulatory in vitro test battery is known to have a high sensitivity, which is at the expense of the specificity. The high number of false positive in vitro results leads to excessive in vivo follow-up studies. In the case of cosmetics it may even induce the ban of the particular compound since in Europe the use of experimental animals is no longer allowed for cosmetics. In this article, an alternative approach to derisk a misleading positive Ames test is explored. Hereto we first tested the performance of five existing computational tools to predict the potential mutagenicity of a data set of 132 cosmetic compounds with a known genotoxicity profile. Furthermore, we present, as a proof-of-principle, a strategy in which a combination of computational tools and mechanistic information derived from in vitro transcriptomics analyses is used to derisk a misleading positive Ames test result. Our data shows that this strategy may represent a valuable tool in a weight-of-evidence approach to further evaluate a positive outcome in an Ames test.

AB - Prior to the downstream development of chemical substances, including pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, their influence on the genetic apparatus has to be tested. Several in vitro and in vivo assays have been developed to test for genotoxicity. In a first tier, a battery of two to three in vitro tests is recommended to cover mutagenicity, clastogenicity and aneugenicity as main endpoints. This regulatory in vitro test battery is known to have a high sensitivity, which is at the expense of the specificity. The high number of false positive in vitro results leads to excessive in vivo follow-up studies. In the case of cosmetics it may even induce the ban of the particular compound since in Europe the use of experimental animals is no longer allowed for cosmetics. In this article, an alternative approach to derisk a misleading positive Ames test is explored. Hereto we first tested the performance of five existing computational tools to predict the potential mutagenicity of a data set of 132 cosmetic compounds with a known genotoxicity profile. Furthermore, we present, as a proof-of-principle, a strategy in which a combination of computational tools and mechanistic information derived from in vitro transcriptomics analyses is used to derisk a misleading positive Ames test result. Our data shows that this strategy may represent a valuable tool in a weight-of-evidence approach to further evaluate a positive outcome in an Ames test.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978912215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978912215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/mutage/gew008

DO - 10.1093/mutage/gew008

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84978912215

VL - 31

SP - 453

EP - 461

JO - Mutagenesis

JF - Mutagenesis

SN - 0267-8357

IS - 4

ER -