The development of an in vitro Pig-a assay in L5178Y cells
A recent flow cytometry-based in vivo mutagenicity assay involves the hemizygous phosphatidylinositol class A (Pig-a) gene. Pig-a forms the catalytic subunit of N-acetylglucosaminyltransferase required for glycophosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor biosynthesis. Mutations in Pig-a prevent GPI-anchor synthesis resulting in loss of cell-surface GPI-linked proteins. The aim of the current study was to develop and validate an in vitro Pig-a assay in L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells. Ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS)-treated cells (186.24–558.72 µg/ml; 24 h) were used for method development and antibodies against GPI-linked CD90.2 and stably expressed CD45 were used to determine GPI-status by flow cytometry. Antibody concentration and incubation times were optimised (0.18 µg/ml, 30 min, 4 °C) and Zombie Violet™ (viability marker; 0.5%, 30 min, RT) was included. The optimum phenotypic expression period was 8 days. The low background mutation frequency of GPI-deficiency [GPI(−)] in L5178Y cells (0.1%) constitutes a rare event, thus flow cytometry acquisition parameters were optimised; 104 cells were measured at medium flow rate to ensure a CV ≤ 30%. Spiking known numbers of GPI(−) cells into a wild-type population gave high correlation between measured and spiked numbers (R2 0.999). We applied the in vitro Pig-a assay to a selection of well-validated genotoxic and non-genotoxic compounds. EMS, N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea and 4-nitroquinoline-N-oxide dose dependently increased numbers of GPI(−) cells, while etoposide, mitomycin C, and a bacterial-specific mutagen did not. Cycloheximide and sodium chloride were negative. Sanger sequencing revealed Pig-a mutations in the GPI(−) clones. In conclusion, this in vitro Pig-a assay could complement the in vivo version, and follow up weak Ames positives and late-stage human metabolites or impurities.
KeywordsMutation GPI anchor Flow cytometry Micronucleus Sequencing
This work was funded by AstraZeneca.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors disclose no potential conflicts of interest.
- Allan AL, Keeney M (2010) Circulating tumor cell analysis: technical and statistical considerations for application to the clinic. J Oncol 2010:426218. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/426218
- Dertinger SD, Phonethepswath S, Avlasevich SL et al (2012) Efficient monitoring of in vivo Pig-a gene mutation and chromosomal damage: summary of 7 published studies and results from 11 new reference compounds. Toxicol Sci 130(2):328–348. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfs258 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Dobrovolsky VN, Shaddock JG, Mittelstaedt RA, Miura D, Heflich RH (2013) Detection of in vivo mutation in the Hprt and Pig-a genes of rat lymphocytes. Methods Mol Biol 1044:79–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-529-3_4
- Fowler P, Whitwell J, Jeffrey L, Young J, Smith K, Kirkland D (2010) Etoposide; colchicine; mitomycin C and cyclophosphamide tested in the in vitro mammalian cell micronucleus test (MNvit) in Chinese hamster lung (CHL) cells at Covance laboratories; Harrogate UK in support of OECD draft Test Guideline 487. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 702(2):175–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2010.02.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hillmen P, Bessler M, Mason PJ, Watkins WM, Luzzatto L (1993) Specific defect in N-acetylglucosamine incorporation in the biosynthesis of the glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchor in cloned cell lines from patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria. Proc Natl Acad Sci 90(11):5272–5276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kimoto T, Horibata K, Miura D et al (2016) The PIGRET assay, a method for measuring Pig-a gene mutation in reticulocytes, is reliable as a short-term in vivo genotoxicity test: summary of the MMS/JEMS-collaborative study across 16 laboratories using 24 chemicals. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 811:3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2016.10.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kirkland D, Kasper P, Martus H-J, Muller L, van Benthem J, Madia F, Corvi R (2016) Updated recommended lists of genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals for assessment of the performance of new or improved genotoxicity tests. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 795:7–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2015.10.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Krüger CT, Fischer BM, Armant O, Morath V, Strähle U, Hartwig A (2016) The in vitro PIG-A gene mutation assay: glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-related genotype-to-phenotype relationship in TK6 cells. Arch Toxicol 90(7):1729–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-016-1707-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Labash C, Bryce S, Bemis JC, Dertinger SD (2015b) Development of an in vitro Pig-a gene mutation assay based on L5178Y cells and the surface markers CD90 and CD45. Environ Mol Mutagen 56:S53-S53Google Scholar
- Nakamura J, Gul H, Tian X, Bultman SJ, Swenberg JA (2012) Detection of PIGO-deficient cells using proaerolysin: a valuable tool to investigate mechanisms of mutagenesis in the DT40 cell system. PLoS One 7(3):e33563. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033563 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- NC3Rs National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (2016) The 3Rs. http://nc3rs.org.uk/the-3rs. Accessed 28 Apr 2017
- NCBI (2017) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_011081.2
- O’Donovan M (2012) A critique of methods to measure cytotoxicity in mammalian cell genotoxicity assays. Mutagenesis 27(6):615–621Google Scholar
- OECD (2014) OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. Test no. 487: in vitro mammalian cell micronucleus testGoogle Scholar
- Wishart DS, Knox C, Guo AC, Shrivastava S, Hassanali M, Stothard P, Chang Z, Woolsey J (2006) DrugBank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration. Nucleic Acids Res 34(suppl 1):D668–D672Google Scholar