title: Comparison of male versus female responses in the Pig-a mutation assay.
abstract: Validation of the Pig-a gene mutation assay has been based mainly on studies in male rodents. To determine if the mutagen-induced responses of the X-linked Pig-a gene differ in females compared to males, 7- or 14-week old male and female Sprague Dawley rats were exposed to N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea (ENU). In the study with the 7-week old rats, exposure was to 0, 1, 5 or 25mg ENU/kg/day for three consecutive days (study Days 1-3). Pig-a mutant phenotype reticulocyte (RET(CD59-)) and mutant phenotype erythrocyte (RBC(CD59-)) frequencies were determined on study Days -4, 15, 29 and 46 using immunomagnetic separation in conjunction with flow cytometric analysis (In Vivo MutaFlow®). Additionally, blood samples collected on Day 4 were analysed for micronucleated reticulocyte (MN-RET) frequency (In Vivo MicroFlow®). The percentage of reticulocytes (%RET) was markedly higher in the 7-week old males compared to females through Day 15 (2.39-fold higher on Day -4). At 25mg/kg/day, ENU reduced Day 4 RET frequencies in both sexes, and the two highest dose levels resulted in elevated MN-RET frequencies, with no sex or treatment × sex interaction. The two highest dose levels significantly elevated the frequencies of mean RET(CD59-) and RBC(CD59-) in both sexes from Day 15 onward. RET(CD59-) and RBC(CD59-) frequencies were somewhat lower for females compared to males at the highest dose level studied, and differences in RET(CD59-) resulted in a statistically significant interaction effect of treatment × sex. In the study with 14-week old rats, treatment was for 3 days with 0 or 25mg ENU/kg/day. RET frequencies differed to a lesser degree between the sexes, and in this case there was no evidence of a treatment × sex interaction. These results suggest that the slightly higher response in younger males than in the younger females may be related to differences in erythropoiesis function at that age. In conclusion, while some quantitative differences were noted, there were no qualitative differences in how males and females responded to a prototypical mutagen, and support the contention that both sexes are equally acceptable for Pig-a gene mutation studies.
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA .
authors.forename: Carson
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Labash
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA .
authors.forename: Svetlana L
authors.initials: SL
authors.lastname: Avlasevich
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA .
authors.forename: Kristine
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Carlson
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA .
authors.forename: Dorothea K
authors.initials: DK
authors.lastname: Torous
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA .
authors.forename: Ariel
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Berg
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA .
authors.forename: Jeffrey C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Bemis
authors.affiliation: Toxicology Consulting Services, Bonita Springs, FL, USA.
authors.forename: James T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: MacGregor
authors.affiliation: Litron Laboratories, Rochester, NY, USA , sdertinger@litronlabs.com.
authors.forename: Stephen D
authors.initials: SD
authors.lastname: Dertinger
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D005038:Ethylnitrosourea / Q000633:toxicity; D005260:Female; D008297:Male; D008565:Membrane Proteins / Q000235:genetics*; D015162:Micronucleus Tests; D016296:Mutagenesis; D009153:Mutagens / Q000633:toxicity; D009154:Mutation; D059645:Mutation Rate; D017207:Rats, Sprague-Dawley; D012156:Reticulocytes / Q000187:drug effects
chemical_list: D008565:Membrane Proteins; D009153:Mutagens; C080086:phosphatidylinositol glycan-class A protein; D005038:Ethylnitrosourea
references.citation: Mutat Res. 2011 Apr 3;721(2):163-70
references.pmid: 21277384
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):699-710
references.pmid: 22167885
references.citation: Toxicol Sci. 2012 Dec;130(2):328-48
references.pmid: 22923490
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):690-8
references.pmid: 21910140
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Apr 27;96(9):5209-14
references.pmid: 10220445
references.citation: Nature. 2014 May 15;509(7500):282-3
references.pmid: 24834516
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2014 May;55(4):299-308
references.pmid: 24449360
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Apr;52(3):205-23
references.pmid: 20740635
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2008 May;49(4):256-64
references.pmid: 18288722
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):731-7
references.pmid: 22052432
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2004;44(5):427-35
references.pmid: 15517570
references.citation: Mutat Res. 1993 Oct;292(2):129-35
references.pmid: 7692249
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):721-30
references.pmid: 22167886
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):738-47
references.pmid: 22020836
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2008 Oct;49(8):614-21
references.pmid: 18626999
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):748-55
references.pmid: 22052433
references.citation: Toxicol Sci. 2003 Aug;74(2):309-14
references.pmid: 12773756
references.citation: Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2015 May 1;783:23-35
references.pmid: 25953398
references.citation: Toxicol Sci. 2010 Jun;115(2):401-11
references.pmid: 20202993
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Dec;52(9):685-9
references.pmid: 21976154
references.citation: Cancer Res. 2001 Jan 15;61(2):654-8
references.pmid: 11212264
references.citation: Environ Mol Mutagen. 2010 Oct-Dec;51(8-9):825-35
references.pmid: 20857433
references.citation: Toxicol Sci. 2010 Mar;114(1):59-70
references.pmid: 19965957
references.citation: Mutagenesis. 2015 May;30(3):325-34
references.pmid: 25820171
references.citation: Mutat Res. 2013 Aug 15;755(2):126-34
references.pmid: 23792374