Structure–Activity Relationships Imply Different Mechanisms of Action for Ochratoxin A-Mediated Cytotoxicity and Genotoxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ochratoxin A (OTA) is a fungal toxin that is classified as a possible human carcinogen based on sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity in animal studies. The toxin is known to promote oxidative DNA damage through production of reactive oxygen species (ROS). The toxin also generates covalent DNA adducts, and it has been difficult to separate the biological effects caused by DNA adduction from that of ROS generation. In the current study, we have derived structure-activity relationships (SAR) for the role of the C5 substituent of OTA (C5-X = Cl) by first comparing the ability of OTA, OTBr (C5-X = Br), OTB (C5-X = H), and OTHQ (C5-X = OH) to photochemically react with GSH and 2'-deoxyguanosine (dG). OTA, OTBr, and OTHQ react covalently with GSH and dG following photoirradiation, while the nonchlorinated OTB does not react photochemically with GSH and dG. These findings correlate with their ability to generate covalent DNA adducts (direct genotoxicity) in human bronchial epithelial cells (WI26) and human kidney (HK2) cells, as evidenced by the (32)P-postlabeling technique. OTB lacks direct genotoxicity, while OTA, OTBr, and OTHQ act as direct genotoxins. In contrast, their cytotoxicity in opossum kidney epithelial cells (OK) and WI26 cells did not show a correlation with photoreactivity. In OK and WI26 cells, OTA, OTBr, and OTB are cytotoxic, while the hydroquinone OTHQ failed to exhibit cytotoxicity. Overall, our data show that the C5-Cl atom of OTA is critical for direct genotoxicity but plays a lesser role in OTA-mediated cytotoxicity. These SARs suggest different mechanisms of action (MOA) for OTA genotoxicity and cytotoxicity and are consistent with recent findings showing OTA mutagenicity to stem from direct genotoxicity, while cytotoxicity is derived from oxidative DNA damage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".