Application of a new approach methodology (NAM)-based strategy for genotoxicity assessment of data-poor compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conventional battery for genotoxicity testing is not well suited to assessing the large number of chemicals needing evaluation. Traditional in vitro tests lack throughput, provide little mechanistic information, and have poor specificity in predicting in vivo genotoxicity. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) aim to accelerate the pace of hazard assessment and reduce reliance on in vivo tests that are time-consuming and resource-intensive. As such, high-throughput transcriptomic and flow cytometry-based assays have been developed for modernized in vitro genotoxicity assessment. This includes: the TGx-DDI transcriptomic biomarker (i.e., 64-gene expression signature to identify DNA damage-inducing (DDI) substances), the MicroFlow ® assay (i.e., a flow cytometry-based micronucleus (MN) test), and the MultiFlow ® assay (i.e., a multiplexed flow cytometry-based reporter assay that yields mode of action (MoA) information). The objective of this study was to investigate the utility of the TGx-DDI transcriptomic biomarker, multiplexed with the MicroFlow ® and MultiFlow ® assays, as an integrated NAM-based testing strategy for screening data-poor compounds prioritized by Health Canada’s New Substances Assessment and Control Bureau. Human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells were exposed to 3 control and 10 data-poor substances, using a 6-point concentration range. Gene expression profiling was conducted using the targeted TempO-Seq™ assay, and the TGx-DDI classifier was applied to the dataset. Classifications were compared with those based on the MicroFlow ® and MultiFlow ® assays. Benchmark Concentration (BMC) modeling was used for potency ranking. The results of the integrated hazard calls indicate that five of the data-poor compounds were genotoxic in vitro , causing DNA damage via a clastogenic MoA, and one via a pan-genotoxic MoA. Two compounds were likely irrelevant positives in the MN test; two are considered possibly genotoxic causing DNA damage via an ambiguous MoA. BMC modeling revealed nearly identical potency rankings for each assay. This ranking was maintained when all endpoint BMCs were converted into a single score using the Toxicological Prioritization (ToxPi) approach. Overall, this study contributes to the establishment of a modernized approach for effective genotoxicity assessment and chemical prioritization for further regulatory scrutiny. We conclude that the integration of TGx-DDI, MicroFlow ® , and MultiFlow ® endpoints is an effective NAM-based strategy for genotoxicity assessment of data-poor compounds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".