MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302607968 · doi:10.1093/mutage/gew009

Empirical analysis of BMD metrics in genetic toxicology part II:<i>in vivo</i>potency comparisons to promote reductions in the use of experimental animals for genetic toxicity assessment

2016· article· en· W2302607968 on OpenAlex
John W. Wills, Alexandra S. Long, George E. Johnson, Jeffrey C. Bemis, Stephen D. Dertinger, Wout Slob, Paul A. White

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMutagenesis · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersHealth CanadaNational Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsCovariateGenotoxicityIn vivoToxicologyMicronucleus testBiologyPharmacologyComputational biologyPotencyGeneticsStatisticsToxicityMedicineInternal medicineMathematicsIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genotoxicity tests have traditionally been used only for hazard identification, with qualitative dichotomous groupings being used to identify compounds that have the capacity to induce mutations and/or cytogenetic alterations. However, there is an increasing interest in employing quantitative analysis of in vivo dose-response data to derive point of departure (PoD) metrics that can be used to establish human exposure limits or margins of exposure (MOEs), thereby supporting human health risk assessments and regulatory decisions. This work is an extension of our companion article on in vitro dose-response analyses and outlines how the combined benchmark dose (BMD) approach across included covariates can be used to improve the analyses and interpretation of in vivo genetic toxicity dose-response data. Using the BMD-covariate approach, we show that empirical comparisons of micronucleus frequency dose-response data across multiple studies justifies dataset merging, with subsequent analyses improving the precision of BMD estimates and permitting attendant potency ranking of seven clastogens. Similarly, empirical comparisons of Pig-a mutant phenotype frequency data collected in males and females justified dataset merging across sex. This permitted more effective scrutiny regarding the effect of post-exposure sampling time on the mutagenicity of N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea observed in reticulocytes and erythrocytes in the Pig-a assay. The BMD-covariate approach revealed tissue-specific differences in the induction of lacZ transgene mutations in Muta™Mouse specimens exposed to benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), with the results permitting the formulation of mechanistic hypotheses regarding the observed potency ranking. Lastly, we illustrate how historical dose-response data for assessments that examined numerous doses (i.e. induced lacZ mutant frequency (MF) across 10 doses of BaP) can be used to improve the precision of BMDs derived from datasets with far fewer doses (i.e. lacZ MF for 3 doses of dibenz[a,h]anthracene). Collectively, the presented examples illustrate how innovative use of the BMD approach can permit refinement of the use of in vivo data; improving the efficacy of experimental animal use in genetic toxicology without sacrificing PoD precision.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it