Development of a toxicogenomics in vitro assay for the efficient characterization of compounds
Abstract
In vitro toxicogenomics represents a useful approach for evaluating the toxic properties of new drug candidates early in the drug discovery process using minimal amounts of compounds. The aim of this study was to develop in vitro-based gene expression assays for two prototypical toxicological classes: aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) agonists and peroxisome proliferator activated receptor α (PPARα) agonists. Primary rat hepatocytes were exposed to a number of class-specific compounds, including 3-methylcholanthrene, aroclor, and β-napthoflavone as AhR agonists, bezafibrate, clofibrate, and Wy-14643 as peroxisome proliferators, and chlorpheniramine, penicillin and spectinomycin as negative controls. Global gene expression profiles were generated with microarrays for each class of compounds. Using linear discriminant analysis coupled with permutation-based t-test, gene signatures were established to classify compounds according to a discriminant score. The final gene signatures consist of eight genes for AhR agonism and 11 genes for PPARα agonism, and were further validated using additional compounds. The assay was initially developed using a microarray platform. The authors then evaluated whether it could be transferred to a more cost-effective platform with higher throughput. The results indicate that a small set of genes can be used to quantitatively assess the degree to which a compound falls into a certain mechanistic toxicological class. While this study only focused on two classes, it could be expanded to encompass other toxicological mechanistic classes as well. Furthermore, by adapting this type of assay to a higher throughput platform, in vitro toxicogenomics can represent an effective approach to generate robust toxicological data early in the drug discovery process.
Papers of special note have been highlighted as either of interest (•) or of considerable interest (••) to readers.
Bibliography
- 1 Johnson DE, Wolfgang GH: Predicting human safety: screening and computational approaches. Drug Discov.Today5, 445–454 (2000).
- 2 Kola I, Landis J: Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3(8), 711–715 (2004).
- 3 Yang Y, Blomme EA, Waring JF: Toxicogenomics in drug discovery: from preclinical studies to clinical trials. Chem. Biol. Interact.150, 71–85 (2004).•• A comprehensive review of how toxicogenomics can and has been applied in drug discovery and development.
- 4 McMillian M, Nie AY, Parker JB et al.: A gene expression signature for oxidant stress/reactive metabolites in rat liver. Biochem. Pharmacol.68, 2249–2261 (2004).•• Gene expression signature was identified through in vivo toxicogenomics to predict the oxidative stress potential of compounds. Also demonstrates the importance of reference databases in identifying gene expression signatures.
- 5 Waring JF, Jolly RA, Ciurlionis R et al.: Clustering of hepatotoxins based on mechanism of toxicity using gene expression profiles. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.175, 28–42 (2001).•• One of the pioneering studies to demonstrate the application of gene expression profiling in the field of toxicology.
- 6 Waring JF, Ciurlionis R, Jolly RA, Heindel M, Ulrich RG: Microarray analysis of hepatotoxins in vitro reveals a correlation between gene expression profiles and mechanisms of toxicity. Toxicol. Lett.120, 359–368 (2001).• Demonstrates that gene expression profiling using in vitro systems can distinguish compounds that have different mechanisms of toxicity.
- 7 Burczynski ME, McMillian M, Ciervo J et al.: Toxicogenomics-based discrimination of toxic mechanism in HepG2 human hepatoma cells. Toxicol. Sci.58, 399–415 (2000).• Demonstrates the superior discriminant power of a small set of genes, or signatures, in toxicity classification.
- 8 Hestermann EV, Brown M: Agonist and chemopreventative ligands induce differential transcriptional cofactor recruitment by aryl hydrocarbon receptor. Mol. Cell Biol.23, 7920–7925 (2003).
- 9 Denison MS, Nagy SR: Activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor by structurally diverse exogenous and endogenous chemicals. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.43, 309–334 (2003).
- 10 Lehmann JM, Lenhard JM, Oliver BB, Ringold GM, Kliewer SA: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors α and γ are activated by indomethacin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. J. Biol. Chem.272, 3406–3410 (1997).
- 11 Backlund M, Johansson I, Mkrtchian S, Ingelman-Sundberg M: Signal transduction-mediated activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor in rat hepatoma H4IIE cells. J. Biol. Chem.272, 31755–31763 (1997).
- 12 Hurst CH, Waxman DJ: Activation of PPARα and PPARγ by environmental phthalate monoesters. Toxicol. Sci.74, 297–308 (2003).
- 13 Hanlon PR, Zheng W, Ko AY, Jefcoate CR: Identification of novel TCDD-regulated genes by microarray analysis. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.202, 215–228 (2005).
- 14 Burczynski ME, Lin HK, Penning TM: Isoform-specific induction of a human aldo-keto reductase by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), electrophiles, and oxidative stress: implications for the alternative pathway of PAH activation catalyzed by human dihydrodiol dehydrogenase. Cancer Res.59, 607–614 (1999).
- 15 Lawrence JW, Li Y, Chen S et al.: Differential gene regulation in human versus rodent hepatocytes by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) α. PPARα fails to induce peroxisome proliferation-associated genes in human cells independently of the level of receptor expression. J. Biol. Chem.276, 31521–31527 (2001).
- 16 Hijikata M, Wen JK, Osumi T, Hashimoto T: Rat peroxisomal 3-ketoacyl-CoA thiolase gene. Occurrence of two closely related but differentially regulated genes. J. Biol. Chem.265, 4600–4606 (1990).
- 17 Schoonjans K, Watanabe M, Suzuki H et al.: Induction of the acyl-coenzyme A synthetase gene by fibrates and fatty acids is mediated by a peroxisome proliferator response element in the C promoter. J. Biol. Chem.270, 19269–19276 (1995).
- 18 Broustas CG, Larkins LK, Uhler MD, Hajra AK: Molecular cloning and expression of cDNA encoding rat brain cytosolic acyl-coenzyme A thioester hydrolase. J. Biol. Chem.271, 10470–10476 (1996).
- 19 Lindquist PJ, Svensson LT, Alexson SE: Molecular cloning of the peroxisome proliferator-induced 46-kDa cytosolic acyl-CoA thioesterase from mouse and rat liver – recombinant expression in Escherichia coli, tissue expression, and nutritional regulation. Eur. J. Biochem.251, 631–640 (1998).
- 20 Knehr M, Thomas H, Arand M, Gebel T, Zeller HD, Oesch F: Isolation and characterization of a cDNA encoding rat liver cytosolic epoxide hydrolase and its functional expression in Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem.268, 17623–17627 (1993).
- 21 Le Jossic-Corcos C, Duclos S, Ramirez LC et al.: Effects of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α activation on pathways contributing to cholesterol homeostasis in rat hepatocytes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta1683(1–3), 49–58 (2004).
- 22 Jessen BA, Mullins JS, Peyster A, Stevens G: Assessment of hepatocytes and liver slices as in vitro test systems to predict in vivo gene expression. Toxicol. Sci.75, 208–222 (2003).
- 23 Leutenegger CM, Higgins J, Matthews TB et al.: Real-time TaqMan® PCR as a specific and more sensitive alternative to the branched-chain DNA assay for quantitation of simian immunodeficiency virus RNA. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses17, 243–251 (2001).
- 24 Irizarry RA, Bolstad BM, Collin F, Cope LM, Hobbs B, Speed TP: Summaries of Affymetrix GeneChip probe level data. Nucleic Acids Res.31, e15 (2003).
- 25 Hollingshead D, Lewis DA, Mirnics K: Platform influence on DNA microarray data in postmortem brain research. Neurobiol. Dis.18, 649–655 (2005).
