Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36271823›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental and molecular mutagenesis2022

Impact of sampling time on the detection of mutations in rapidly proliferating tissues using transgenic rodent gene mutation models: A review.

George R Douglas, Carol Beevers, Bhaskar Gollapudi, Zena Keig-Shevlin, David Kirkland, Jason M O'Brien, Jan van Benthem, Carole L Yauk, Robert R Young, Francesco Marchetti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental and molecular mutagenesis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Benchmark Response (BMR) Values for In Vivo Mutagenicity Endpoints.Environmental and molecular mutagenesis · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

George R DouglasHealth Canada, Ottawa, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4397-4190
Carol BeeversBroughton Group, Lancashire, UK.
Bhaskar GollapudiToxicology Consultant, Midland, Michigan, USA.
Zena Keig-ShevlinLabcorp Early Development Laboratories Ltd, Harrogate, UK.
David KirklandKirkland Consulting, Tadcaster, UK.
Jason M O'BrienEnvironment and Climate Change Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Jan van BenthemNational Institute for the Netherlands Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Carole L YaukDeptartment of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Robert R YoungToxicology Consultant, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Francesco MarchettiHealth Canada, Ottawa, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9435-4867

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The OECD Test Guideline 488 (TG 488) for the Transgenic Rodent Gene Mutation Assay has undergone several revisions to update the recommended design for studying mutations in somatic tissues and male germ cells. The recently revised TG recommends a single sampling time of 28 days following 28 days of exposure (i.e., 28 + 28 days) for all tissues, irrespective of proliferation rates. An alternative design (i.e., 28 + 3 days) is appropriate when germ cell data is not required, nor considered. While the 28 + 28 days design is clearly preferable for slowly proliferating somatic tissues and germ cells, there is still uncertainty about the impact of extending the sampling time to 28 days for rapidly somatic tissues. Here, we searched the available literature for evidence supporting the applicability and utility of the 28 + 28 days design for rapidly proliferating tissues. A total of 79 tests were identified. When directly comparing results from both designs in the same study, there was no evidence that the 28 + 28 days regimen resulted in a qualitatively different outcome from the 28 + 3 days design. Studies with a diverse range of agents that employed only a 28 + 28 days protocol provide further evidence that this design is appropriate for rapidly proliferating tissues. Benchmark dose analyses demonstrate high quantitative concordance between the 28 + 3 and 28 + 28 days designs for rapidly proliferating tissues. Accordingly, our review confirms that the 28 + 28 days design is appropriate to assess mutagenicity in both slowly and rapidly proliferating somatic tissues, and germ cells, and provides further support for the recommended design in the recently adopted TG 488.

Indexed as

MutagensRodentiaAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedGerm CellsMaleMutagenicity TestsMutationMutagensOECD test guidelineoptimal sampling timetransgenic mutation assay

Identifiers

PMID36271823
PMCPMC10099936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.