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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Project description:Efforts to develop alternatives which can at least partially replace some of the currently used in vivo tests are ongoing. The recently ended FP6 European project carcinoGENOMICS had the goal to use the combination of toxicogenomics and in vitro cell culture models for identification of genotoxic- and non-genotoxic carcinogen-specific gene signatures. In this study is presented a part of the outcome of the project and in particular the performance of the gene classifier derived after exposure of the HepaRG cell line to prototypical hepatocarcinogens. Upon analyzing the data at a gene and a pathway level by using diverse biostatistical approaches, a clear-cut separation of the genotoxic from the non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens and non-carcinogens was achieved (up to 88% correct prediction). The most characteristic pathway for genotoxic exposure was DNA damage. Further to show the robustness of the HepaRG model, the interlaboratory reproducibility of 3 blindly tested compounds was assessed. The results showed between 20% and 35% reproducibility. The subsequent classification of the 3 blindly tested compounds resulted in correct prediction of the genotoxicant, whereas the other two compounds were misclassified. In conclusion, the combination of transcriptomics and HepaRG in vitro cell model provides a solid basis for the detection of the genotoxic potential of unknown chemicals.
Project description:The Norway rat has important impacts on our life. They are amongst the most used research subjects, resulting in ground-breaking advances. At the same time, wild rats live in close association with us, leading to various adverse interactions. In face of this relevance, it is surprising how little is known about their natural behaviour. While recent laboratory studies revealed their complex social skills, little is known about their social behaviour in the wild. An integration of these different scientific approaches is crucial to understand their social life, which will enable us to design more valid research paradigms, develop more effective management strategies, and to provide better welfare standards. Hence, I first summarise the literature on their natural social behaviour. Second, I provide an overview of recent developments concerning their social cognition. Third, I illustrate why an integration of these areas would be beneficial to optimise our interactions with them.