Toxicologic Pathology

The pace at which new drug candidates are being identified by Discovery Research demands that they be screened for preclinical attributes rapidly and efficiently. The early identification and elimination of compounds with toxic liabilities will produce safer drugs in a shorter time period, and with an increased rate of success. Most major pharmaceutical companies now recognize the strategic role of pathology support for research and have developed specific units to effect this outcome. The early interaction of these pathologists with drug discovery teams to identify compounds with toxic liabilities is critical. Approache s being used include high throughput in vitro screens to predict the relative toxicity of discovery compounds and to provide early indications of underlying mechanisms, target profiling to predict consequences of receptor-ligand interactions at other-than-indicated target sites, and acute in vivo studies to establish tolerability limits and target organs of toxicity. These approaches include the application of contemporary tools such as genomics, proteomics, metabonomics, and genetically engineered animal models. To maximize the benefit of discovery pathology, it is critical that pharmaceutical companies also actively participate in non-proprietary knowledge sharing and the education of pathologists and toxicologists to lead these efforts in the future.

Pathologists are uniquely qualified to play a central role in driving drug discovery and development programs by: 1) establishing disease models to assess potential therapies, 2) characterizing modifications in the disease state in response to therapies, 3) characterizing toxicologic mechanisms and responses to drug candidates, and 4) facilitating multidisciplinary efforts to monitor for the clinical occurrence, progression, and reversibility of adverse events. Such nontraditional deployment of resources must, to be viable, produce benefits to the pharmaceutical industry comparable to those of more conventional activities such as delivery of data in nonclinical safety studies. Additionally, benefits must be tangible from standpoints such as timesavings or improved quality of research decisions, manifesting as either program acceleration or improved candidate survival.

One of the main concepts in toxicology and risk assessment is the identification of compound s with the least toxicity, gaining increased understanding of the underlying mechanisms of efficacy and toxicity so as to accelerate the early selection of compound s for development. For this purpose, “cuttingedge” technologies, such as flow cytometry (FC), laser scanning cytometry (LSC) and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM), have proved to be valuable tools. FC, LSC and CLSM have been successfully applied in a wide range of areas within toxicology and research including genetics, reproduction, dermatology, pathology and target organ toxicity. The scope of this paper is to give a short overview of the usefulness of the different laser applications. Specific examples of the impact of these technologies will be presented or can be found in the references. Flow cytometry methods have been successfully applied in immunophenotyping, micronuclei scoring, polyploidy determination, apoptosis and cell cycle evaluation, cell proliferation and quantification. A three-parameter FC method for the analysis of testicular toxicity has also been established as an alternative to traditional histopathological methods. This method allows a large number of cells to be analysed in a short time and provides quantitative values to evaluate testicular damage in the rat. Laser scanning cytometry has been used in our unit for rat blood cell immunophenotyping, tumor proliferation, apoptosis and cell cycle analysis on minipig and rat skin and cardiac cells identification. The wide range of applications that can be applied with the LSC shows the enormous potential of this technology in research and development. Confocal laser scanning microscope was used in our laboratory, in collaboration with the research department, to investigate the mechanisms underlying hepatic lesions found in dogs, to detect fibrinogen influx into rat lung, to explore the mechanism of eye toxicity and to quantify dopaminergic fibers in brain sections. Integrating these technologies within discovery pathology allowed us to understand disease processes with respect to their development and subsequent consequences. It contributes to descriptive pathologic diagnostic and allows a productive interaction with research and development. These technologies offer a range of novel applications and have been shown to be useful tools in terms of specificity, sensitivity, reliability, rapidity and quantification. Expertise in cutting-edge technologies, pathology and cell and molecular biology is essential to a successful and flexible interaction across all therapeutic areas in drug discovery.

The field of toxicogenomics, which currently focuses on the application of large-scale differential gene expression (DGE) data to toxicology, is starting to influence drug discovery and development in the pharmaceutical industry. Toxicological pathologists, who play key roles in the development of therapeutic agents, have much to contribute to DGE studies, especially in the experimental design and interpretation phases. The intelligent application of DGE to drug discovery can reveal the potential for both desired (therapeutic) and undesired (toxic) responses. The pathologist's understanding of anatomic, physiologic, biochemical, immune, and other underlying factors that drive mechanisms of tissue responses to noxious agents turns a bewildering array of gene expression data into focused research programs. The latter process is critical for the successful application of DGE to toxicology. Pattern recognition is a useful first step, but mechanistically based DGE interpretation is where the long-term future of these new technologies lies. Pathologists trained to carry out such interpretations will become important members of the research teams needed to successfully apply these technologies to drug discovery and safety assessment. As a pathologist using DGE, you will need to learn to read DGE data in the same way you learned to read glass slides, patiently and with a desire to learn and, later, to teach. In return, you will gain a greater depth of understanding of cell and tissue function, both in health and disease.

The characteristics and pathogenesis of the cardiovascular toxicity induced by the type III selective phosphodiesterase inhibitor SK&F 95654 were examined in 2 studies. Sprague—Dawley rats received either a single sc injection of 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg SK&F 95654 and were euthanized at 24 hours after administration of the drug (Study 1), or were given a single subcutaneous (sc) injection of 100 mg/kg SK&F 95654 and euthanized at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24 hours, or 2 weeks after treatment (Study 2). Control rats received either DMSO or saline. Myocardial lesions and vascular lesions of the mesentery, spleen, and pancreas were seen 24 hours after dosing with either 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg SK&F 95654. The frequency and severity of these lesions (evaluated after the 100 mg/kg dose) increased with time over a period of 1 to 24 hours. By 2 weeks, the lesions subsided. Cardiac lesions consisted of myocyte necrosis with hypercontraction bands, inflammatory cell infiltration, interstitial hemorrhage, and interstitial edema. Vascular lesions of the mesentery were most prominent and consisted of vasodilatation and inflammation in the small-sized vessels, arterial medial necrosis and hemorrhage, and venous thrombosis. The vascular lesions included: leukocyte adhesion to endothelial cells, transendothelial migration of leukocytes, and inflammatory cell infiltration into vessel walls. Affected vessels included arteries, terminal arterioles, capillaries, postcapillary venules, and veins. Apoptosis of endothelial and smooth muscle cells was detected in the mesenteric vasculature by both TUNEL assay and electron microscopy. Evidence of endothelial cell activation in the mesenteric arteries and veins was also observed by electron microscopy. Immunohistochemical staining detected enhanced endothelial cell expression of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) and von Willebrand factor (vWF) in the mesenteric arteries and veins. Mast cells were noted to be more prevalent in affected mesenteric tissue from drug-treated animals. The present findings suggest that apoptosis of endothelial and smooth muscle cells, activation of endothelial cells, recruitment of mast cells, and increased expression of adhesion molecules are important factors to the overall pathogenesis of SK&F 95654-induced vasculitis.

Exposure of experimental animals to biologically effective levels of chemicals, either endogenous or exogenous, the latter of either synthetic or natural origin, elicits a response(s) that reflects the diverse ways in which the various units of organization of an organism deal with chemical perturbation. For some chemicals, an initial response constitutes an adaptive effect that maintains homeostasis. Disruption of this equilibrium at any level of organization leads to an adverse effect, or toxicity. The livers of laboratory animals and humans, like other organs, undergo programmed phases of growth and development, characterized by proliferation followed by differentiation. With organ maturity, the process of differentiation leads to the commitment of differentiated cells to constitutive functions that maintain homeostasis and to specialized functions that serve organismal needs. In the mature livers of all species, proliferation of all cell types subsides to a low level. Thus, the mature liver consists of 2 types of cells: intermediate cells, the hepatocytes, which replicate infrequently, but can respond to signals for replication, and replicating cells, the stem cells, endothelial, Kupffer, and stellate cells (Ito or pericytes), bile duct epithelium, and granular lymphocytes (pit cells). Quantifiable alterations or effects at the molecular level underlie alterations at the organelle level, which in turn lead to alterations at the cellular level, which can ultimately be manifested as a change in the whole organism. Alterations can be quantal (binary), either all or none, as with cell replication, cell necrosis or apoptosis, and cell differentiation, which take place at the cellular level. They can also be graded or continuous (nonbinary), as with enzyme induction, organelle hypertrophy, and extracellular matrix elaboration, occurring either at the intra- or extra (supra) cellular level. Any quantifiable change induced in the function or structure of a cell or tissue constitutes a response or effect. Each of the several types of cell in the liver responds to a given stimulus according to its localization and function. Generally, renewing cells are more vulnerable to chemical injury than intermediate cells, which are largely quiescent. Hepatic adaptive responses usually involve actions of the chemical on cellular regulatory pathways, often receptor mediated, leading to changes in gene expression and ultimately alteration of the metabolome. The response is directed toward maintaining homeostasis through modulation of various cellular and extracellular functions. At all levels of organization, adaptive responses are beneficial in that they enhance the capacity of all units to respond to chemical induced stress, are reversible and preserve viability. Such adaptation at subtoxic exposures is also referred to as hormesis. In contrast, adverse or toxic effects in the liver often involve chemical reaction with cellular macromolecules and produce disruption of homeostasis. Such effects diminish the capacity for response, can be nonreversible at all levels of organization, and can compromise viability. An exposure that elicits an adaptive response can produce toxicity with longer or higher exposures (ie, above a threshold) and the mechanism of action changes with the effective dose. A variety of hepatic adaptive and toxic effects has been identified. Examples of adaptive effects are provided by phenobarbital and ciprofibrate, whereas p-dichlorobenzene and 2-acetylaminofluorene illustrate different toxic effects. The effects of chemicals in the liver are, in general, similar between experimental animals and humans, although exceptions exist. Thus, identification and monitoring of both types of effect are integral in the safety assessment of chemical exposures.

The adaptive immune system in vertebrates has evolved to provide host resistance to infectious microorganisms and malignant disease. Normal immune function and the induction of specific immune responses require the orchestrated interaction between cells and molecules both within and outside the lymphoid system. Immunotoxicology can be defined as the study of adverse health effects that may result from the interaction of xenobiotics with the immune system. In general terms such effects can take one of two forms. The first of these is immunotoxicity (or immunosuppression) where there is a perturbation of, or damage to, one or more components of the immune system resulting in impaired immune function and reduced host resistance. The design and interpretation of experimental immunotoxicity studies and the investigation of clinical immunosuppression require consideration of the relationship between changes in the structure and/or function of discrete components of the immune system and holistic changes in the susceptibility to infectious and malignant disease. The other main way in which chemicals may cause adverse health effects secondary to interaction with the immune system is through stimulation of specific immune responses that result in allergic disease. Allergy to chemicals and proteins can take many forms, including allergic contact dermatitis, allergic sensitization of the respiratory tract (associated with rhinitis and/or asthma), systemic allergic reactions (associated frequently with drug treatment), and gastrointestinal disease. Here there is a need to distinguish between immunogenic responses per se and those immune responses that are of sufficient vigor and of the quality necessary to provoke allergic sensitization. The purpose of this article is to explore the extent to which distinctions can be drawn between adverse and nonadverse effects in the context of immunotoxicity and allergy.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently in the process of developing screening and testing methodologies for the assessment of agents that may possess endocrine-like activity—the so-called endocrine disruptors. Moreover, the EPA has signaled its intention of placing information arising from such studies on the worldwide web. This has created significant interest in how such information may be used in risk assessment and by policymakers and the public in the potential regulation or deselection of specific chemical agents. The construction of lists of endocrine disruptors, although fulfilling the requirements of some parties, is really of little use when the nature of the response, the dose level employed, and the lifestage of the test species used are not given. Thus, we have already seen positive in vitro information available on the interaction with a receptor being used as a key indicator when the results of large, high quality in vivo studies showing no adverse changes have been ignored. Clearly a number of in vitro systems are available to ascertain chemical interaction with specific (mainly steroid) hormone receptors including a number of reporter gene assays. These assays only provide indicators of potential problems and should not be, in isolation, indicators of toxicity. Likewise, short-term in vivo screens such as the uterotrophic and Hershberger studies are frequently conducted in castrated animals and thus indicate the potential for a pharmacological response in vivo rather than an adverse effect. A number of new end points have been added to standard rodent testing protocol s in the belief of providing more sensitivity to detect endocrine related changes. These include the measurement of anogenital distance (AGD), developmental landmarks [vaginal opening (VO), preputial separation (PPS)], and in some studies the counting of nipples and areolae on males. AGD, VO, and PPS are all affected by the size of the pup in which they are measured and should always be compared using bodyweight as a covariate. The historical control database for such changes is gradually growing, albeit that if pups are not individually identified it becomes problematic to associate any change with a specific malformation or to assess whether a delay or advance in, for example, developmental landmarks is biologically significant. Agents that significantly reduce AGD in males (it is an androgen-dependent variable) frequently have other more adverse changes associated with this end point (eg, reproductive tract malformations), but a 2 to 3% change in AGD although measurable is unlikely to be biologically of importance and in isolation would not necessarily be considered adverse. Retention of thoracic nipples in male rat pups is also an indicator of impaired androgen status. Recent studies have also shown that this retention for some endocrine active chemicals is permanent. Thus, the presence of a permanent structural change that is rarely found in adult control animals could be considered a malformation and therefore a developmental adverse effect on which risk assessment decisions could be made. The advent of multigeneration reproduction studies as the definitive studies for the assessment of the dose-response relationships and risk assessment for endocrine disruptors has shown that current testing protocols may be inadequate to reliably detect the adverse effects of concern as only 1 adult/sex/litter is examined. A number of the effects on reproductive development although, due to an in utero exposure, will not be manifest until after puberty or at adulthood. The use of only a limited number of animals to examine such changes, particularly for weaker acting materials indicates that some agents may have been examined in well-conducted, modern protocols but have insufficient power to detect low incidence phenomena (eg, a 5% incidence of malformations).

One of the most important quantitative outputs from toxicity studies is identification of the highest exposure level (dose or concentration) that does not cause treatment related effects that could be considered relevant to human health risk assessment. A review of regulatory and other scientifi c literature and of current practices has revealed a lack of consistency in definition and application of frequently used terms such as No Observed Effect Level (NOEL), No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL), adverse effect, biologically significant effect, or toxicologically significant effect. Moreover, no coherent criteria were found that could be used to guide consistent interpretation of toxicity studies, including the recognition and differentiation between adverse and nonadverse effects. This presentation will address these issues identified first by proposing a standard set of definitions for key terms such as NOEL and NOAEL that are frequently used to describe the overall outcome of a toxicity study. Second, a coherent framework is outlined that can assist the toxicologist in arriving at consistent study interpretation. This structured process involves two main steps. In the first, the toxicologist must decide whether differences from control values are treatment related or if they are chance deviations. In the second step, only those differences judged to be effects are further evaluated in order to discriminate between those that are adverse and those that are not. For each step, criteria are described that can be used to make consistent judgments. In differentiating an effect from a chance finding, consideration is given inter alia to dose response, spurious measurements in individual parameters, the precision of the measurement under evaluation, ranges of natural variation and the overall biological plausibility of the observation. In discriminating between the adverse and the non-adverse effect consideration is given to: whether the effect is an adaptive response, whether it is transient, the magnitude of the effect, its association with effects in other related endpoints, whether it is a precursor to a more signifi cant effect, whether it has an effect on the overall function of the organism, whether it is a specific effect on an organ or organ system or secondary to general toxicity or whether the effect is a predictable consequence of the experimental model. In interpreting complex studies it is recognised that a weight of the evidence approach, combining the criteria outlined here to reach an overall judgment, is the optimal way of applying the process. It is believed that the use of such a scheme will help to improve the consistency of study interpretation that is the foundation of hazard and risk assessment.

Historical control data have been shown to be valuable in the interpretation and evaluation of results from rodent carcinogenicity studies. Standardization of terminology and histopathology procedures is a prerequisite for meaningful comparison of control data across studies and analysis of potential carcinogenic effects. Standardization is particularly critical for the construction of a database that includes incidence data from different studies evaluated by pathologists in different laboratories. Standardized nomenclature and diagnostic criteria have been established for neoplasms and proliferative lesions. Efforts of the National Toxicology Program, the Society of Toxicologic Pathology (STP), and the Registry of Industrial Toxicology Animal-data (RITA) have led to a harmonized pathology nomenclature for the rat and the mouse. This nomenclature with detailed descriptions of lesions is available in publications by the STP and International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). A listing of these terms is available on the World Wide Web. Utilizing the model established by RITA and working with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), companies with laboratories in North America formed a working group in 1994 to establish and maintain a database of neoplastic and proliferative lesions from control animals in carcinogenicity studies. The rationale for development of the North American Control Animal Database (NACAD), the factors that influence tumor incidence, operation of the database, and the benefits to be realized by using a standardized approach are discussed.

Historical control tumor data are useful in the interpretation of long-term rodent carcinogenicity bioassays, especially to assess the occurrence of rare tumors and marginally increased tumor incidences. The major prerequisites to compare historical control data with studies under evaluation are the validity and consistency of the respective databases. The RITA (Registry of Industrial Toxicology Animal-data) database for historical data of tumors and pre-neoplastic lesions collects data according to highly standardized procedures including tissue sampling and trimming, histopathology according to internationally harmonized nomenclature and diagnostic criteria, and peer review. All lesions that are entered are unanimously diagnosed according to IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer)/WHO criteria. The validity of data is additionally confirmed by a complete peer review performed by a database pathologist. Equivocal diagnoses and selected cases are additionally submitted to a panel of RITA pathologists. In the RITA database, there are currently 10,896 rats from 106 studies with more than 17,604 primary tumors and 16,551 pre-neoplastic lesions. The RITA database for historical control data for Wistar and Sprague Dawley rats as well as for different mouse strains is briefl ydescribed. Based upon RITA background data, the survival rate of Wistar rats has been consistent over a period of 10 years. The occurrence of tumor-bearing animals also shows a stable percentage over a decade. Additionally, examples of how historical control data may support carcinogenic risk assessment in cases of rare tumors or marginally increased incidences of tumors and pre-neoplastic lesions are given.

Accuracy of the pathology data is crucial since rodent studies often provide critical data used for setting human chemical exposure standards. Diagnoses represent a judgment on the expected biological behavior of a lesion and peer review can improve diagnostic accuracy and consistency. With the conduct of 500 2-year rodent studies, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) has refined its process for comprehensive review of the pathology data and diagnoses. We have found that careful judgment can improve and simplify the review, whereas simply applying a set review procedure may not assure study quality. The use of reviewing pathologists and pathology peer review groups is a very effective procedure to increase study quality with minimal time and cost. New genomic technology to assess differential gene expression is being used to predict morphological phenotypes such as necrosis, hyperplasia, and neoplasia. The challenge for pathologists is to provide uniform pathology phenotypes that can be correlated with the gene expression changes. The lessons learned in assuring data quality in standard rodent studies also applies to the emerging field of toxicogenomics.

A pathology report is written to convey information concerning the pathologic findings in a study. This type of report must be complete, accurate and communicate the relative importance of various findings in a study. The overall quality of the report is determined by three Quality Indicators: thoroughness, accuracy, and consistency. Thoroughness is the identification of every lesion present in a particular organ or tissue, including spontaneous background lesions. Experienced pathologists familiar with background lesions may disregard certain types of lesions or establish a threshold or a severity above which background lesions are diagnosed. Accuracy is the ability to make, and precisely communicate, correct diagnoses. Nomenclature of lesions is a matter of definition and experienced pathologists generally agree as to what terms are to be used. Consistency is the uniform use of a specific term to record a defined lesion and implies that the same diagnostic criteria are being followed for each type of diagnosis. The relative severity of nonneoplastic lesions can be recorded either semiquantitatively or quantitatively. Semiquantitative analysis involves the application of defined severity grades or ranges for specific lesions. Quantitative analysis (counts and measurements) can be performed manually or electronically, utilizing image analysis and stereological techniques to provide numerical values. When both qualitative and quantitative parameters are applied in preparation of a pathology report, the recorded pathology findings can be interpreted and put into perspective. The use of this approach assures a reader that the pathology report meets the highest standards.

This study examines growth alterations in liver foci and tumor development as a basis for the different susceptibility in hepatocarcinogenes is found among different strains of mice. Male C57, B6C3F 1, and C3H mice treated with a single dose (1 mg/kg) of N,N-diethylnitrosamine (DEN) at 15 days of age and followed up to 12 months displayed a strain-dependent (C3H > B6C3F1 > C57) increase in incidence, number, volume fraction, and size of foci and macroscopic lesions (masses). DEN-treated mice exhibited a time-dependent increase in foci size but not in foci number. Phenobarbital (PB) treatment (500 ppm) in the drinking water starting 2 weeks after DEN-initiation did not affect the incidence or number of masses and foci. In all 3 strains, the bromodeoxyuridin e labeling index in foci correlated with foci growth, supporting the major role of cell proliferation in foci growth. Measurements of apoptosis by morphological criteria with H&E staining suggest that intrafocal apoptosis may be a late event preventing foci growth and possibly also promoting focal cell selection, whereas extrafocal apoptosis may facilitate clonal growth by removing adjacent normal cells. The onset of conversion of foci to masses also correlated with strain susceptibility to hepatocarcinogenesis .

In organs with diverse cell populations, it is not uncommon for one type of cell to respond while others are spared. Even in an organ with common cell types, such as hepatocytes within the liver, the population of cells may respond with different sensitivities for injury or for biochemical responses to toxicants. In the liver, many tumor promoters induce cytochrome P450 enzymes and other proteins in centrilobular cells at much lower doses than required to cause induction in periportal cells. In addition, these induction responses appear to occur at the level of individual cells—a 50% response of the liver for induction does not represent 50% induction in all cells. Instead, half of the cells are fully induced and half are unaffected. Cells “switch” from one phenotypic state to another. Over the past 10 years, several attempts have been made to model these cellular switches and to understand their relevance for hepatic tumor promotion and risk assessment. The data used for analyzing these switches include responses of the entire liver (total induction), responses of individual cells in the liver (regional induction), and cellular responses such as proliferation and apoptosis. This brief overview describes the development of biologically based, dose-response (BBDR) models for protein induction and tumor promotion in liver by 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo -p-dioxin (TCDD) with emphasis on the role of specific types of histological and molecular data in providing insights about mechanisms for cellular switches and their implications for tumor promotion. As the biological basis of these switches become unraveled and incorporated into the models, these BBDR models should eventually serve to improve risk assessments with a variety of liver tumor promoters with receptor-based modes of action.

Cancer risk assessment involves the steps of hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. The rapid advances in the use of molecular biology approaches has had an impact on all 4 components, but the greatest overall current and future impact will be on the dose-response assessment because this requires an understanding of the mechanisms of carcinogenesis, both background and induced by environmental agents. In this regard, hazard identification is a qualitative assessment and dose-response is a quantitative estimate. Thus, the latter will ultimately require a quantitative assessment of molecular endpoints that are used to describe the dose-response for cancer. It has been possible for many years to quantitate alterations at the level of the single gene. For example, analysis of mutation frequency by phenotypic selection, analysis of transcription (mRNA) by Northern blot, analysis of translation (proteins) by Western blot, and analysis of kinetics of metabolism from metabolite levels. However, it is becoming clear that it is necessary when considering risk for adverse health outcomes to develop quantitative approaches for whole cell phenotypes or organ effects. For example, cancer is a whole tissue phenotype, not a feature of single gene mutations, in spite of the multistep (multimutation) mode of formation of a tumor. Thus, there is the need to quantitate the circuitry of a cell: the metabolic/biochemical pathways, genetic regulation pathways, and signaling pathway s in normal and stressed conditions. The hypothesis presented by Hanahan and Weinberg of the requirement for 6 acquired characteristics for tumor development, independent of tissue type and species or inducer, seems to provide a viable approach. This hypothesi s can be addressed through whole cell molecular assessment using microarray s and quantitative PCR together with the emerging proteomic approaches. This is the world of the new computational cell biology.

Several laboratories have used recombinant DNA technology in plant breeding to improve compositional, processing, and agronomic characteristics of plants. These transformed plants have been extensively tested in fi eld trials, have gained full regulatory approvals and are currently being marketed in a number of countries around the world. This paper briefl y summarizes the approach used to assure the safety of foods and feeds derived from these genetically modified crops, as exemplified by data on Roundup Ready soybeans that has been developed by Monsanto Company using biotechnology in order to confer tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide, by the production of the CP4 enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase protein. The results of the studies demonstrate that Roundup Ready soybeans are as safe as traditional soybeans with respect to food and feed safety.

Therecombinant DNA (rDNA) technique is expected to bring about great progress in the improvement of breeding technology and the development of new plant varieties showing high quality and high yield, such as those with excellent pest and disease resistance, those with environmental stress tolerance, and so forth. In the United States and Canada, many genetically modified (GM) crop plants were commercialized as early as 1994. In Japan, 35 transgenic crop plants, such as herbicide tolerant soybean, cotton, and canola, and insect-resistant corn, cotton, and potatos, were authorized and considered marketable until April 2001. The general public, however, is not familiar with rDNA technology, and some people seem to feel uncomfortable with biotechnology, frequently because of the difficulty of the technology and lacking of sufficient information. New labeling systems were initiated in April 2001 in Japan to provide information regarding the use of GM crops as raw material.

The safety assessment for marketing purposes of genetically modified (GM) foods in the 15 Member States of the European Union (EU) is based on the Novel Foods and Novel Food Ingredients Regulation adopted in May 1997. Before a GM food can be approved under the Regulation, it must satisfy three criteria: Gm food must be safe, it must not mislead the consumer and it must be nutritionally adequate. The EU Scientific Committee on Food has published a set of guidelines describing the type of information expected from a company in support of an application for approval of a GM food or food ingredient. Despite this rigorous procedure and there being no evidence of harm resulting from the consumption of GM foods worldwide, there is essentially no market in the EU for such products at present. Possible reasons for this are discussed and the view put forward that the market for GM foods will change only when there are more clearly perceived consumer benefits.

In the relatively short time since their commercial introduction in 1996, genetically modified (GM) crops have been rapidly adopted in the United States GM crops are regulated through a coordinated framework developed in 1992 and administered by three agencies—the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that ensures the products are safe to grow, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that ensures the products are safe for the environment, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that ensures the products are safe to eat. Rigorous food and environmental safety assessments must be completed before GM crops can be commercialized. Fifty-one products have been reviewed by the FDA, including several varieties of corn, soybeans, canola, cotton, rice, sugar beets, potatoes, tomatoes, squash, papaya, and flax. Because FDA considers these crops “substantially equivalent” to their conventional counterparts, no special labeling is required for GM crops in the United States and they are managed as commodities with no segregation or identity preservation. GM crops have thus made their way through commodity distribution channels into thousands of ingredients used in processed foods. It has been estimated that 70% to 85% of processed foods on supermarket shelves in the United States today contain one or more ingredients potentially derived from GM crops. The food industry and retail industry have been monitoring the opinions of their consumers on the GM issue for the past several years. Numerous independent groups have also surveyed consumer concerns about GM foods. The results of these surveys are shared and discussed here.

The international pharmaceutical regulatory academic and industrial toxicology communities are collaborating to improve the efficiency and effectivenes s of cancer hazard identification based on dramatic improvements in our understanding of the cancer process. Guidelines emanating from the International Conference on Harmonization provide for use of in vivo alternatives. Standard practices utilizing lifetime rat and mouse studies are recognized as seriously flawed with over 80% false positive rates. Furthermore, tobacco, the most important human carcinogen commercialized by industry, is negative in these traditional lifetime studies. The lifetime mouse bioassay is generally recognized in pharmaceutical development as not adding value in safety assessment. An international consortium under the aegis of ILSI has recently completed an evaluation of alternative mouse cancer models. Transgenic models are less expensive, use fewer animals and take less time than traditional lifetime bioassays. These alternative models have now been sufficiently evaluated to be considered useful in the safety assessment plan for pharmaceuticals in development. Specifically for example, the rasH2 appears useful in detecting nongenotoxic as well as genotoxic rodent tumorigens with improved concordance with human response. The p53^+/- heterozygous mouse apparently identifies hormonal carcinogenic mechanisms, immunosuppressive carcinogens, and genotoxic carcinogens. The TG:AC predicts for rodent tumorigens applied topically. Recent experiences at FDA, CPMP, and MHW indicate that with good planning and agency interactions, regulatory acceptability can be anticipated.

The Tg rasH2 transgenic mouse has been developed as an alternative to the lifetime mouse bioassay to predict the carcinogenic potential of chemicals. Unlike the p53^+/- mouse, the Tg rasH2 mouse is sensitive to both genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens. The Tg rasH2 mouse, officially designated CB6F1-TgN (RasH2), contains multiple copies of the human c-Ha-ras oncogene and promoter within its genome. These mice develop spontaneous and chemically induced neoplasms earlier in life and in greater numbers than wild-type mice, reflecting their enhanced sensitivity to neoplasia. The most common spontaneous neoplasms in control Tg rasH2 mice 8 to 9 months of age are lung adenomas and carcinomas (7.4% incidence), splenic hemangiomas and hemangiosarcoma s (5.4%), forestomach squamous cellpapillomas and carcinomas (2.4%), and skin neoplasms (1.2%). Simulations have demonstrated that 20 to 25 mice/sex/treatment group are required to provide the assay with adequate statistical power. Four of 6 known or suspected human carcinogens tested in Tg rasH2 mice were positive in this assay. For 19 nonmutagenic agents testing positive in conventional rodent bioassays, 7 chemicals were positive, 10 chemicals were negative, and 2 were equivocal. None of the 10 nonmutagenic rodent carcinogens that were negative in the Tg rasH2 mouse model are considered to be human carcinogens. All nonmutagenic chemicals that were negative in the conventional rodent bioassays were also negative in the Tg rasH2 model. Results for 15 of 18 mutagenic chemicals tested in Tg rasH2 mice agreed with the results of conventional rodent bioassays, and 3 results were equivocal. The Tg rasH2 mouse model appears to predict known or suspected human carcinogens as well as the traditional mouse bioassay, but with fewer positive results for nongenotoxic compounds that are not considered human carcinogens. The Tg rasH2 mouse model is the most thoroughly tested in vivo alternative to the lifetime mouse bioassay for nongenotoxic compounds administered by oral or parenteral routes. The U.S. FDA Carcinogenicity Assessment Committee has determined that the Tg rasH2 model has been adequately evaluated for consideration for carcinogenicity testing of pharmaceutical candidates and its use could contribute to the weight of evidence for carcinogenicity assessment. The FDA will consider proposals to replace lifetime mouse carcinogenicity studies with 6-month Tg rasH2 mouse studies to support pharmaceutical registration on a case-by-case basis.

ILSI-HESI sponsored an international consortium for the evaluation of alternative models, including the Trp53+ /- mouse, for use in short-term carcinogenicity testing of pharmaceuticals. Products of the ILSI evaluation included guidance for protocol design and assay interpretation, spontaneous tumor incidences, diagnostic criteria for common proliferative lesions, and results of assays for pharmaceutical agents that are known human and/or rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens. Based on the ILSI evaluation, recommended protocol elements for this model include: 26-week study duration, groups ≥15/sex/dose, a positive control group (benzene or p-cresidine), a negative control group and 3 dose groups, the high dose set at MTD or MFD, routine in-life evaluations, and complete necropsies with microscopic evaluation of tissues. Favored statistical analyses are trend tests or pair-wise comparisons, with no adjustments for survival. For an assay to be valid, positive control groups must demonstrate an effect, and the MTD or MFD must be reached in both sexes. Criteria for a negative response include a valid assay, no statistical increase in common tumors, no biologically significant numerical increase in rare tumors, and no tumor incidence above that of historical controls. Positive responses can consist of statistically significant increases in the incidence of a common tumor or numerical increases in a rare tumor, which may not be statistically significant. In either case, the incidence should be clearly above historical control values. Evidence of a dose response or occurrence of hyperplasia in a tissue with a neoplastic response can support interpreting an assay as positive. The two most common spontaneous tumors (>1%) in Trp53+/- mice are malignant thymic lymphomas and subcutaneous sarcomas. Use of implanted electronic transponders can increase the incidence of sarcomas. Important rare spontaneous tumors (incidence ≤1%) are osteosarcomas and pulmonary adenomas. Many other tumor types have been reported to occur sporadically in Trp53+/- mice. Diagnostic challenges for this model include differentiating lymphoma from atypical thymic hyperplasia and recognizing the variable histopathology of subcutaneous sarcomas. In reported bioassays, Trp53+/- mice responded positively to genotoxic carcinogens, negatively to non-genotoxic rodent carcinogens, and negatively to noncarcinogens, indicating that unlike the 2-year mouse assay, this short-term assay is not overly sensitive. Positive responses often elicited an increase in tumors that occur spontaneously. To successfully use this model, pathologists must understand the biology of the Trp53 tumor suppressor gene and the principles of protocol design and data interpretation for short-term bioassays. They must also know the historical response pattern of Trp53+/- mice to test agents and be able to accurately diagnose tumors in this model. Use of the Trp53+/- mouse presents the pharmaceutical industry with several challenges, one of which is managing the uncertainty created by a lack of precedents for regulatory decisions about some possible outcomes for short-term carcinogenicity assays.

Transgenic mouse strains offer the prospect of significant benefits in the in vivo assessment of carcinogenic potential. The European Regulatory Authorities have been supportive of their inclusion as one of the second-test options in the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for the Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human use (ICH). However, there is a concern regarding premature systematic use of these models. At present, the information from the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) project suggests that the transgenic models under study are similarly sensitive to genotoxic pharmaceuticals. There are apparently some false negatives and false positives. For regulatory purposes, it is not yet possible to differentiate the models with respect to hazard identification and risk assessment. The evaluation of the models has reached an interesting but, at certain points, equivocal stage. Based on the weight of evidence gathered thus far, regulatory authorities cannot neglect the outcome of such studies but need to be cautious in their interpretation of data from such models, and the application in risk assessment procedures.