Expression data from the liver of rat treated by Piperonyl butoxide and Dammar resin
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
ORGANISM(S): Rattus norvegicus
PROVIDER: GSE71413 | GEO | 2015/07/29
SECONDARY ACCESSION(S): PRJNA291179
REPOSITORIES: GEO
Similar Datasets
Project description:Several studies have successfully detected hepatocarcinogenicity in rats based on gene expression data. Here, we constructed a model for detecting non-genotoxic (NGTX) hepatocarcinogens and predicted their MOAs in rats. Piperonyl butoxide (PBO) and Dammar resin (DAM) are NGTX hepatocarcinogens. Gene expression data in the liver treated by PBO and DAM was used for validation of constructed model. There are four and three dosing groups including control group in PBO and DAM, respectively. The replicates is three samples in each dosing group. Doses for PBO are 0, 500, 1000 and 1500 mg/kg and those for DMA are 0, 800 and 2000 mg/kg.
2015-07-29 | E-GEOD-71413 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:In this study we performed microarray-based molecular profiling of liver samples from Wistar rats exposed to genotoxic carcinogens (GC), nongenotoxic carcinogens (NGC) or non-hepatocarcinogens (NC) for up to 14 days. In contrast to previous toxicogenomics studies aimed at the inference of molecular signatures for assessing the potential and mode of compound carcinogenicity, we considered multi-level omics data. Besides evaluating the predictive power of signatures observed on individual biological levels, such as mRNA, miRNA and protein expression, we also introduced novel feature representations which capture putative molecular interactions or pathway alterations by integrating expression profiles across platforms interrogating different biological levels. Male Wistar rats were treated by oral gavage with the eight nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogens Phenobarbital sodium (PB), Piperonylbutoxide (PBO), Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), Acetamide (AA), Methapyrilene HCl (MPy), Methylcarbamate (Mcarb), Diethylstilbestrol (DES) and Ethionine (ETH), the two genotoxic carcinogens C.I Direct Black (CIDB) and dimethylnitrosamine (DMN), the two non-hepatocarcinogens Cefuroxime (CFX) and Nifedipine (Nif), and the three compounds with undefined carcinogenic class Cyproterone acetate (CPA), Thioacetamid (TAA) and Wy-14643 (Wy). Depending on the administered compound, livers were taken after 3, 7, or 14 days for histopathological evaluation. From the five animals per treatment group three animals were selected based on the histopathological findings and subjected to molecular profiling using Affymetrix RG-230A arrays (mRNA expression), Agilent G4473A arrays (miRNA expression) and Zeptosens ZeptoMARK reverse arrays (protein expression).
2014-08-18 | E-GEOD-53083 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:In this study we performed microarray-based molecular profiling of liver samples from Wistar rats exposed to genotoxic carcinogens (GC), nongenotoxic carcinogens (NGC) or non-hepatocarcinogens (NC) for up to 14 days. In contrast to previous toxicogenomics studies aimed at the inference of molecular signatures for assessing the potential and mode of compound carcinogenicity, we considered multi-level omics data. Besides evaluating the predictive power of signatures observed on individual biological levels, such as mRNA, miRNA and protein expression, we also introduced novel feature representations which capture putative molecular interactions or pathway alterations by integrating expression profiles across platforms interrogating different biological levels. Male Wistar rats were treated by oral gavage with the eight nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogens Phenobarbital sodium (PB), Piperonylbutoxide (PBO), Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), Acetamide (AA), Methapyrilene HCl (MPy), Methylcarbamate (Mcarb), Diethylstilbestrol (DES) and Ethionine (ETH), the two genotoxic carcinogens C.I Direct Black (CIDB) and dimethylnitrosamine (DMN), the two non-hepatocarcinogens Cefuroxime (CFX) and Nifedipine (Nif), and the three compounds with undefined carcinogenic class Cyproterone acetate (CPA), Thioacetamid (TAA) and Wy-14643 (Wy). Depending on the administered compound, livers were taken after 3, 7, or 14 days for histopathological evaluation. From the five animals per treatment group three animals were selected based on the histopathological findings and subjected to molecular profiling using Affymetrix RG-230A arrays (mRNA expression), Agilent G4473A arrays (miRNA expression) and Zeptosens ZeptoMARK reverse arrays (protein expression).
2014-08-18 | E-GEOD-53082 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:In this study we performed microarray-based molecular profiling of liver samples from Wistar rats exposed to genotoxic carcinogens (GC), nongenotoxic carcinogens (NGC) or non-hepatocarcinogens (NC) for up to 14 days. In contrast to previous toxicogenomics studies aimed at the inference of molecular signatures for assessing the potential and mode of compound carcinogenicity, we considered multi-level omics data. Besides evaluating the predictive power of signatures observed on individual biological levels, such as mRNA, miRNA and protein expression, we also introduced novel feature representations which capture putative molecular interactions or pathway alterations by integrating expression profiles across platforms interrogating different biological levels. Male Wistar rats were treated by oral gavage with the eight nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogens Phenobarbital sodium (PB), Piperonylbutoxide (PBO), Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), Acetamide (AA), Methapyrilene HCl (MPy), Methylcarbamate (Mcarb), Diethylstilbestrol (DES) and Ethionine (ETH), the two genotoxic carcinogens C.I Direct Black (CIDB) and dimethylnitrosamine (DMN), the two non-hepatocarcinogens Cefuroxime (CFX) and Nifedipine (Nif), and the three compounds with undefined carcinogenic class Cyproterone acetate (CPA), Thioacetamid (TAA) and Wy-14643 (Wy). Depending on the administered compound, livers were taken after 3, 7, or 14 days for histopathological evaluation. From the five animals per treatment group three animals were selected based on the histopathological findings and subjected to molecular profiling using Affymetrix RG-230A arrays (mRNA expression), Agilent G4473A arrays (miRNA expression) and Zeptosens ZeptoMARK reverse arrays (protein expression).
2014-08-18 | E-GEOD-53084 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:For assessing the cancer-causing potential for humans of a chemical compound, the conventional approach is the use of the 2-year rodent carcinogenicity bioassay, thus alternatives such as in vitro toxicogenomics are highly desired. In the present study, the transcriptomics responses following exposure to genotoxic (GTX) and non-genotoxic (NGTX) hepatocarcinogens and non-carcinogens (NC) in five liver-based in vitro models, namely conventional and epigenetically-stabilized cultures of primary rat hepatocytes, the human hepatoma-derived HepaRG and HepG2 cell lines and the human embryonic stem cell-derived hepatocyte-like cells hES-Heps are examined and compared.
2013-02-20 | GSE40117 | GEO
Project description:In order to screen candidate genes that discriminate genotoxic hepatocarcinogens from nongenotoxic ones, we compared gene expression in the liver of mice treated with 6 genotoxic hepatocarcinogens or 5 nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogens.
2011-10-27 | GSE33248 | GEO
Project description:In order to screen candidate genes that discriminate genotoxic hepatocarcinogens from nongenotoxic ones, we compared gene expression in the liver of mice treated with 6 genotoxic hepatocarcinogens or 5 nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogens. 6 genotoxic and 2 non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens with expression time of 4h, 20h, 14 days, and 28 days
2011-10-26 | E-GEOD-33248 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Liver tumors in rodents are frequently induced by non-genotoxic carcinogens. These hepatocarcinogens generally activate hepatic nuclear receptors (e.g., CAR and PXR), resulting in a cascade of signals causing modifications in the expression of genes responsible for several processes involved in carcinogenesis. Evaluation of the carcinogenic potential of chemicals is a regulatory requirement but is time-consuming and expensive. Consequently, several short-term in vivo and in vitro approaches, using molecular tools, have been proposed as predictive models for non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens. The objective of our study was to discriminate between chemicals that are either non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens or merely hepatotoxicants and also between CAR and PXR modulators on the basis of their gene expression profiles. Thus, we treated rats for seven days with the hepatoxicants, diclofenac and diazepam, or with several CAR and PXR modulators, which were mainly hepatocarcinogens. Different hepatic gene expression profiles were obtained not only between the hepatotoxicants and the non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens but also between the CAR activators phenobarbital, phenytoin and 1,1-bis-(4-chlorophenyl)-2,2-dichloroethene which were grouped together, and the two PXR activators pregnenolone 16α-carbonitrile and clotrimazole. Diethylstilbestrol had an expression profile that was quite distinct from the other PXR activators, suggesting that this compound is certainly not a classic PXR modulator. Moreover, some differences were observed between phenytoin (not considered as a hepatocarcinogen), and the other two CAR activators. Our data therefore indicate that discrimination is possible between hepatocarcinogens and hepatotoxicants, between CAR and PXR modulators and also between compounds within the same class of modulators using a short-term transcriptomic approach. CAR or PXR inducers were administered in suspension to rats (7 weeks old at start of treatment) by oral gavage at a daily dose for 7 consecutive days. Treatment-related changes in gene expression were determined in the liver using whole genome oligonucleotide microarrays.
2013-07-31 | E-GEOD-39350 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Liver tumors in rodents are frequently induced by non-genotoxic carcinogens. These hepatocarcinogens generally activate hepatic nuclear receptors (e.g., CAR and PXR), resulting in a cascade of signals causing modifications in the expression of genes responsible for several processes involved in carcinogenesis. Evaluation of the carcinogenic potential of chemicals is a regulatory requirement but is time-consuming and expensive. Consequently, several short-term in vivo and in vitro approaches, using molecular tools, have been proposed as predictive models for non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens. The objective of our study was to discriminate between chemicals that are either non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens or merely hepatotoxicants and also between CAR and PXR modulators on the basis of their gene expression profiles. Thus, we treated rats for seven days with the hepatoxicants, diclofenac and diazepam, or with several CAR and PXR modulators, which were mainly hepatocarcinogens. Different hepatic gene expression profiles were obtained not only between the hepatotoxicants and the non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens but also between the CAR activators phenobarbital, phenytoin and 1,1-bis-(4-chlorophenyl)-2,2-dichloroethene which were grouped together, and the two PXR activators pregnenolone 16α-carbonitrile and clotrimazole. Diethylstilbestrol had an expression profile that was quite distinct from the other PXR activators, suggesting that this compound is certainly not a classic PXR modulator. Moreover, some differences were observed between phenytoin (not considered as a hepatocarcinogen), and the other two CAR activators. Our data therefore indicate that discrimination is possible between hepatocarcinogens and hepatotoxicants, between CAR and PXR modulators and also between compounds within the same class of modulators using a short-term transcriptomic approach.
2013-07-31 | GSE39350 | GEO