Abstract
The Ames Salmonella test is a widely used bioassay method for assessing the mutagenic potency of a potential carcinogen. The test is quick and reliable, and exploits the correlation that exists between mutagenic potential and carcinogenic potential. The data for this case study came from an international study involving 20 laboratories in nine countries. The laboratories participated in a designed experiment in which substances (complex chemical mixtures of the type encountered in the environment) were evaluated for mutagenicity using the Ames test. A stringent protocol was followed. The study’s principal aim was to investigate intra- and inter-laboratory variation in test results. The data consist of counts of revertant Salmonella colonies at each of six dose levels of a substance. The data were obtained for each of five test substances from each participating laboratory. The bioassays were carried out according to a prescribed factorial experimental design. Three sets of analysts participated in this case study. They were asked to model the dose-response relationship for two substances, to develop an index of the strength of the relationship, and to assess intra- and inter-laboratory variation in bioassay results.
Résumé
Le test d’Ames pour la salmonelle est une méthode de bioessai utilisée couramment pour évaluer le pouvoir mutagène d’un agent cancérigène potentiel. Le test est relativement rapide et fiable, et exploite la corrélation existant entre potentiel mutagène et potentiel cancérigène. Les données pour cette étude de cas proviennent d’une étude internationale impliquant vingt laboratoires dans neuf pays. Les laboratoires ont participé à une expérience planifiée pour laquelle le pouvoir mutagène de certaines substances (préparations chimiques complexes du type rencontré dans l’environnement) fut évalué à l’aide du test d’Ames. Un protocole rigoureux fut suivi. Le but principal de l’étude était d’examiner les variations intra- et inter-laboratoire dans les résultats du test. Les données consistent des comptes de colonies de salmonelle ayant subit une mutation inverse, à six doses différentes d’une substance. Chaque laboratoire participant fournit des données pour chacune des cinq substances à tester. Les bioessais furent effectués d’après un plan d’expérience factoriel prescrit. Trois groupes d’analystes participèrent à cette étude. II leur fut demandé de modéliser la relation dose-réponse pour deux substances, de développer un indice pour la force de cette relation et d’évaluer les variations intra- et inter-laboratoire dans les résultats des bioessais.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abelson, Philip H. (1990). Testing for carcinogens with rodents. Editorial. Science, 249, 1357.
Ames, B.N., Durston, W.E., Yamasaki, E., and Lee, F.D. (1973). Carcinogens are mutagens–a simple test system combining liver homogenates for activation and bacteria for detection. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 70, 2281–2285.
Ames, Bruce N., and Gold, Lois Swirsky (1990). Too many rodent carcinogens: Mitogenesis increases mutagenesis. Science, 249, 970–971.
Ames, Bruce N., and Gold, Lois S. (1991). Response to Rall (1991). Science, 251, 12–13.
Ames, B.N., Lee, F.D., and Durston, W.E. (1973). An improved bacterial test system for the detection and classification of mutagens and carcinogens. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 70, 782–786.
Ashby, J., and Tennant, R.W. (1991). Definitive relationships among chemical structure, carcinogenicity and mutagenicity for 301 chemicals tested by the U.S. NTP [National Toxicology Program]. Mutation Res., 257, 229–306.
Claxton, L.D., and Lewtas, J. (1991). A summary of the EPA/NIST/IPCS collaborative study on complex mixtures using the Salmonella mutagenicity assay. Health Effects Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park.
Kolata, Gina (1990). Scientists question methods used in animal cancer tests. The New York Times, 31 August, pp. Al, A19.
Krewski, D., Leroux, B.G., Bleuer, S.R., and Broekhoven, L.H. (1990). Modeling the Ames Salmonellalmicrosome assay. Technical Report Series #153, Laboratory for Research in Statistics and Probability, Carleton University and University of Ottawa.
Krewski, D., Leroux, B.G., Creason, J., and Claxton, L. (1992). Sources of variation in the mutagenic potency of complex chemical mixtures based on the Salmonella microsome assay. Mutation Res., 276, 33–59.
Lewtas, J., Claxton, L.D., Rosenkranz, H.S., Schuetzle, D., Shelby, M., Matsushita, H., Wurgler, F.E., Zimmerman, F.K., Lofroth, G., May, W.E., Krewski, D., Matsushima, T., Ohnishi, Y., Gopalan, H.N.G., Sarin, R., and Becking, G.C. (1992). Design and implementation of a collaborative study of the mutagenicity of complex mixtures in Salmonella typhimurium. Mutation Res., 276, 3–9.
Margolin, B.H., Kim, B.S., and Risko, K.J. (1989). The Ames Salmonellalmicrosome assay: Issues of inference and validation. J. Amer. Statistical Assoc., 84, 173–215.
Maron, D.M., and Ames, B.N. (1983). Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutation Res., 113, 173–215.
Maugh, Thomas H., II (1990). Carcinogen test process challenged. Los Angeles Times, Aug. 31, p. 1.
May, Willis E., Benner, Bruce A., Jr., Wise, Stephen A., Schuetzle, Dennis, and Lewtas, Joellen (1992). Standard reference materials for chemical and biological studies of complex environmental samples. Mutation Res., 276, 11–22.
McCann, J., Gold, L.S., Hom, L., McGill, R., Graedel, T.E., and Kaldor, J. (1988). Statistical analysis of Salmonella test data and comparison of results of animal cancer tests. Mutation Res., 205, 183–195.
Rall, David P. (1991). Carcinogens and human health: Part 2. Letter to the editor. Science, 251, 10–12.
Snee, R.D., and Irr, J.D. (1984). A procedure for the statistical evaluation of Ames Salmonella assay results: Comparison of results among 4 laboratories. Mutation Res., 128, 115–125.
Tennant, R.W., Margolin, B.H., Shelby, M.D., Zeiger, E., Haseman, J.K., Spalding, J., Caspary, W., Resnick, M., Stasiewicz, S., Anderson, B., and Minor, R. (1987). Prediction of chemical carcinogenicity in rodents from in vitro genetic toxicity assays. Science, 236, 933–941.
Thompson, Larry (1990). High-dose chemical tests on animals overestimate cancer risk, critics say. The Washington Post, 31 August, p. 1.
Travis, C.C., Saulsbury, A.W., and Pack. S.A. Richter (1990). Prediction of cancer potency using a battery of mutation and toxicity data. Mutagenesis, 5, 213–219.
References
Breslow, N.E. (1984). Extra-Poisson variation in log-linear models. AppL Statist., 33, 38–44.
Cochran, W.G., and Cox, G.M. (1957). Experimental Designs. Second Edition. Wiley, New York.
Lawless, J.F. (1987). Negative binomial and mixed Poisson regression. Canad. J. Statist., 15, 209–225.
Margolin, B.H., Kaplan, N., and Zeiger, E. (1981). Statistical analysis of the Ames Salmonella/microsome test. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 78, 3779–3783.
Margolin, B.H., Kim, B.S., and Risko, K.J. (1989). The Ames Salmonella/microsome mutagenicity assay: Issues of inference and validation. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 84, 651–661.
McCullagh, P., and Nelder, J.A. (1989). Generalized Linear Models. Second Edition. Chapman and Hall, London.
References
Breslow, N., and Kaldor, J. (1986). Statistical analysis of data from in-vitro assays of mutagenesis. Long-Term and Short-Term Assays for Carcinogens: A Critical Appraisal (R. Montesano, H. Vainio Bartsch, J. Wilboum, and H. Yamasaki, eds.), Scientific Publication 83, IARC, Lyon, France.
Draper, N., and Smith, H. (1981). Applied Regression Analysis. Second Edition. Wiley, New York.
Eastwood, B.J. (1991). Asymptotic normality and consistency of semi-nonparametric regression estimators using an upwards F test truncation rule. J. Econometrics, 48, 151–181.
Eastwood, B.J., and Gallant, A.R. (1991). Adaptive rules for seminonparametric estimators that achieve asymptotic normality. Econometric Theory, 7, 307–340.
Gallant, A.R. (1981). On the bias in flexible functional forms and an essentially unbiased form: The Fourier flexible form. J. Econometrics, 15, 211–245.
Gallant, A.R. (1982). Unbiased determination of production technologies. J. Econometrics, 20, 285–323.
Gallant, A.R. (1987). Nonlinear Statistical Models. Wiley, New York.
Mallows, C.L. (1973). Some comments on Ci,. Technometrics, 15, 661–675.
Margolin, B.H., Kim, B.S., and Risko, K.J. (1989). The Ames Salmonella/microsome mutagenicity assay: Issues of inference and validation. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 84, 651–661.
SAS Institute Inc. (1987). SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers. Version 6 Edition. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
SAS Institute Inc. (1990). SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 6. Fourth Edition. Volume 2. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
Snee, R.D., and Irr, J.D. (1984). A procedure for the statistical evaluation of Ames Salmonella assay results: Comparison of results among 4 laboratories. Mutation Res., 128, 115–125.
References
Bernstein, L., Kaldor, J., McCann, J., and Pike, M.C. (1982). An empirical approach to the statistical analysis of mutagenesis data from the Salmonella test. Mutation Res., 97, 267–281.
Broekhoven, L.H., and Nestmann, E. (1991). Statistical analysis of the Ames test. Statistics in Toxicology (D. Krewski and C.A. Franklin, eds.), Gordon & Breach, New York, 205–263.
Claxton, L.D., Toney, S., Perry, E., and King, L. (1984). Assessing the effect of colony counting methods and genetic drift on Ames bioassay results. Environmental Mutagenesis 6, 331–342.
Claxton, L.D., Creason, J., Leroux, B., Augurell, E., Bagley, S., Bryant, D.W., Courtois, Y.A., Douglas, G., Clare, C.B., Goto, S., Quillardet, P., Jagannath, D.R., Kataoka, K., Mohn, G., Nielsen, P.A., Ong, T., Pederson, T.C., Shimizu, H., Nylund, L., Tokiwa, H., Vink, G.J., Wang, Y., and Warshawsky, D. (1992a). Results of the WHO/IPCS collaborative study on complex mixtures. Mutation Res., 276, 23–32.
Claxton, L.D., Douglas, G., Krewski, D., Lewtas, J., Matsushita, H., and Rosenkranz, H. (1992b). Overview, conclusions, and recommendations of the IPCS collaborative study on complex mixtures. Mutation Res., 276, 61–80.
Claxton, L.D., Douglas, G., Krewski, D., Lewtas, J., Matsushita, H., and Rosenkranz, H. (1992b). Overview, conclusions, and recommendations of the IPCS collaborative study on complex mixtures. Mutation Res., 276, 61–80.
Consul, P.C. (1989). Generalized Poisson Distributions. Marcel Dekker, New York.
Etzioni, R., and Carlin, B. (1993). Bayesian analysis of the Ames Salmonella/microsome assay. Case Studies in Bayesian Statistics. (C. Gatsonis, R.E. Kass, J. Hodges, and N.D. Singpurwalla, eds.), Springer: New York. To appear.
Krewski, D., Leroux B.G., Creason, J., and Claxton, L. (1992). Sources of variation in the mutagenic potency of complex chemical mixtures based on the Salmonellalmicrosome assay. Mutation Res., 276, 33–59.
Krewski, D., Leroux, B.G., Bleuer, S.R., and Broekhoven, L.H. (1993). Modeling the Ames Salmonella/microsome assay. Biometrics, 49, 499–510.
Knuiman, M.W., Laird, N.M., and Louis, T.A. (1987). Inter-laboratory variability in Ames assay results. Mutation Res., 180, 171–182.
Margolin, B.H., Kaplan, N., and Zeiger, E. (1981). Statistical analysis of the Ames Salmonella/microsome test. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 78, 3779–3783.
Margolin, B.H., Risko, K.J., Shelby, M.D., and Zeiger, E. (1984). Sources of variability in Ames Salmonella typhimurium tester strains: Analysis of the International Collaborative Study on ‘Genetic Drift’. Mutation Res., 130, 11–25.
Margolin, B.H., Kim, B.S., and Risko, K.J. (1989). The Ames Sa/monella/n icrosome assay: Issues of inference and validation. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 84, 651–661.
Maron, D.M., and Ames, B.N. (1983). Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutation Res., 113, 173–215.
McCann, J., Gold, L.S., Horn, L., McGill, R., Graedel, T.E., and Kaldor, J. (1988). Statistical analysis of Salmonella test data and comparison of results of animal cancer tests. Mutation Res., 205, 183–195.
McCullagh, P., and Neider, J.A. (1989). Generalized Linear Models. Second Edition. Chapman & Hall, London.
Myers, L.E., Sexton, N.H., Southerland, L.I., and Wolff, T.J. (1981). Regression analysis of Ames test data. Environmental Mutagenesis, 3, 575–586.
Myers, L.E., Adams, N.H., Hughes, T.J., Williams, L.R., and Claxton, L.D. (1987). An interlaboratory study of an EPA/Ames/Salmonella test protocol. Mutation Res., 182, 121–133.
Myers, L.E., Adams, N., Rao, T.K., Shah, B., and Williams, L. (1991). Microcomputer software for data management and statistical analysis of the Ames/Salmonella test. Statistics in Toxicology (D. Krewski and C.A. Franklin, eds.), Gordon & Breach, New York, 265–279.
Piegorsch, W.W., and Hoel, D.G. (1988). Exploring relationships between mutagenic and carcinogenic potency. Mutation Res., 182, 121–133.
Scheffé, H. (1959). The Analysis of Variance. Wiley, New York.
Snee, R.D., and Irr, J.D. (1984). A procedure for the statistical evaluation of Ames Salmonella assay results. Comparison of results among 4 laboratories. Mutation Res., 128, 115–125.
Stead, A.G., Hasselbad, V., Creason, L.P., and Claxton, L. (1981). Modeling the Ames test. Mutation Res., 85, 13–27.
Tietjen, G.L. (1974). Exact and approximate tests for unbalanced random effects designs. Biometrics, 30, 573–581.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gentleman, J.F., Whitmore, G.A., Darlington, G.A., Eastwood, B.J., Leroux, B.G., Krewski, D. (1994). Estimation of the mutagenic potency of environmental chemicals using short-term bioassay. In: Gentleman, J.F., Whitmore, G.A. (eds) Case Studies in Data Analysis. Lecture Notes in Statistics, vol 94. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2688-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2688-8_8
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-94410-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-2688-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive