title: Somatic recombination, gene amplification and cancer.
abstract: The principle objective of this research programme, to analyse chemical induction of somatic recombination and related endpoints, i.e., mobilization of transposing elements and gene amplification, has been approached by means of several assay systems. These have included Drosophila, Saccharomyces and mammalian cell cultures. 6.1. Screening assays for mitotic recombination. A large number of chemicals have been investigated in the three Drosophila assay systems employed--the multiple wing hair/flare wing spot system developed by Graf et al., 1984, the white-ivory system developed by Green et al., 1986 and the white/white+ eye spot assay developed by Vogel (Vogel and Nivard, 1993). Particularly the screening of 181 chemicals, covering a wide array of chemical classes, by the last mentioned assay has shown that measurement of somatic recombination in Drosophila constitutes a sensitive and efficient short-term test which shows a remarkably good correlation with the agent score of 83 short-term tests analysed by ICPEMC (Mendelsohn et al., 1992; Table 2) as well as the assay performance in international collaborative programmes measuring carcinogen/non-carcinogens (de Serres and Ashby, 1981; Ashby et al., 1985, 1988). Also the wing spot assay has gained wide international recognition as a similarly sensitive test. These two assay systems in Drosophila measure both intrachromosomal events and interchromosomal recombination. The white-ivory system on the other hand is based on the loss of a tandem duplication in the white locus, the mechanism of which is less known, but probably involves intrachromosomal recombination. The difference in the mechanism between this assay and the former two was indicated by the lack of response to methotrexate in the white-ivory assay, while this compound was strongly recombinogenic in both the wing spot and white/white+ assays. The use of different strains of Drosophila with the white/white+ assay demonstrated the importance of the background genotype for the outcome of the test. Up to a 60-fold variation was found between the different genotypes in the response to procarcinogens, evidently dependent on differences in the metabolic activation of procarcinogens. In 1989 Schiestl presented results on intrachromosomal recombination in the strain RS112 of Saccharomyces, which indicated a capability to detect a range of chemical carcinogens, which gave negative results in Ames Salmonella assay. Such a test system, which could identify a larger range of potential carcinogens than conventional short-term tests evidently would be of great value and it therefore seemed of importance to follow up the observations by Schiestl. However, studies within this programme on the same strain of Saccharomyces, as well as the strains D7 (measuring intragenic recombination, intergenic recombination, and point mutation) and JD1 (measuring intragenic recombination at two loci) could not support the observations and interpretation by Schiestl (1989). The Drosophila white-ivory system, which presumably responds primarily by intrachromosomal recombination, did not give positive results with these Salmonella-negative agents either. One system to measure mitotic recombination in mammalian cell cultures was developed in the present programme. It was based on heterozygous mutations in both alleles of the adenosine deaminase gene (ADA). The system selects for proficient recombinants generated by the deficient cells. So far only pilot experiments, indicating that this experimental system operates as planned, have been performed. 6.2 Mechanisms of mitotic recombination The induction of mosaic spots in the wing spot and the white/white+ assays is predominantly dependent on interchromosomal recombination. This is evident from the fact that heterozygous inversions reduce the frequency of spots. A relationship between the length of inversions and the reduction of spots was demonstrated in the white/white+ assay--the long inversion ln(l)sc4L
authors.affiliation: Department of Genetic and Cellular Toxicology, Stockholm University, Sweden.
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Ramel
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Cederberg
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Magnusson
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Vogel
authors.forename: A T
authors.initials: AT
authors.lastname: Natarajan
authors.forename: L H
authors.initials: LH
authors.lastname: Mullender
authors.forename: J M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Nivard
authors.forename: J M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Parry
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Leyson
authors.forename: M A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Comendador
authors.forename: L M
authors.initials: LM
authors.lastname: Sierra
authors.forename: J A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Ferreiro
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Consuegra
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D002478:Cells, Cultured; D004260:DNA Repair; D004251:DNA Transposable Elements; D004330:Drosophila; D005784:Gene Amplification; D006801:Humans; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000209:etiology* / Q000235:genetics; D011995:Recombination, Genetic; D012441:Saccharomyces cerevisiae / Q000235:genetics
chemical_list: D004251:DNA Transposable Elements