Interlaboratory evaluation of a flow cytometric, high content in vitro micronucleus assay

Abstract

An international, multi-lab trial was conducted to evaluate a flow cytometry-based method for scoring micronuclei in mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells [S.L. Avlasevich, S.M. Bryce, S.E. Cairns, S.D. Dertinger, In vitro micronucleus scoring by flow cytometry: differential staining of micronuclei versus apoptotic and necrotic chromatin enhances assay reliability, Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 47 (2006) 56–66]. A reference laboratory investigated the potential of six chemicals to induce micronuclei—the genotoxicants mitomycin C (MMC), etoposide (ETOPO), and vinblastine (VB), and the non-genotoxicants sucrose (SUC), staurosporine (STS), and dexamethasone (DEX). The latter two non-genotoxicants were selected as extreme challenges to the assay because of their potent apoptogenic activity. Three collaborating laboratories were supplied with prototype In Vitro MicroFlow™ kits, and each was assigned one genotoxicant and one non-genotoxicant. Cells were treated continuously for 24 h over a range of concentrations up to 5 mg/ml, or overtly cytotoxic concentrations. Micronuclei were scored via standard microscopy and flow cytometry. In addition to enumerating micronucleus frequencies, a cytotoxicity measurement that is simultaneously acquired with the flow cytometric micronucleus scoring procedure was evaluated (Flow-NBR). With this method, latex particles served as counting beads, and facilitated relative survival measurements that exclude the presence of dead/dying cells. For comparison purposes, additional cytotoxicity endpoints were measured, including several that are based on cell number, and others that reflect compromised membrane integrity, including dye permeability and/or phospholipid distribution. Key findings for this set of compounds include the following: (1) significant discrepancies in top concentration selection were found when cytotoxicity measurements were based on different methods, with the Flow-NBR approach tending to be the most sensitive, (2) both microscopy- and flow cytometry-based scoring methods detected concentration-dependent micronucleus formation for the three genotoxic agents studied, with good agreement between the reference laboratory and the collaborating laboratories, and (3) whereas flow cytometric analyses showed no significant increases for the non-genotoxicants when top concentration selection was based on Flow-NBR, significantly elevated micronucleus frequencies were observed for concentrations that were chosen based on less-sensitive cytotoxicity assays. Collectively, these results indicate that rapid assessment of genotoxicity can be accomplished with a relatively simple flow cytometric technique, and that the scoring system is transferable across laboratories. Furthermore, a concurrent assessment of cytotoxicity, Flow-NBR, may help reduce the occurrence of irrelevant positive results, as it may represent a more appropriate means for choosing top concentration levels. Finally, the data presented herein reinforce concerns about the manner in which cytotoxicity limits are described in guidance documents, since these recommendations tend to cite fixed cut-off values without reference to methodology.