Search

Activation of the RET protooncogene through somatic rearrangements represents the most common genetic alteration in papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). Three main rearranged forms of RET have been described: RET/PTC1 and RET/PTC3, which arise from a paracentric inversion of the long arm of chromosome 10, and RET/PTC2, which originates from a 10;17 translocation. We have developed a dual-color FISH approach to detect RET/PTC rearrangements in interphase nuclei of thyroid lesions. By using a pool of three cosmids encompassing the RET chromosome region and a chromosome 10 centromeric probe, we could discriminate between the presence of an inversion (RET/PTC1 and RET/PTC3) or a translocation (RET/PTC2). We have investigated a series of thyroid tissue samples from Italian and French patients corresponding to a total of 69 PTCs and 22 benign lesions. Among PTCs, 13 (18.8%) showed a RET rearrangement, and 11 (15.9%) of these carried an inversion (RET/PTC1 or RET/PTC3) in more than 10% of the nuclei examined. Activated forms of RET were also observed in three adenomas. RT-PCR analysis on the same samples confirmed the presence and the type of rearrangement predicted using FISH analysis. An interesting difference in the frequency and type of RET rearrangements was detected between the Italian and the French patients. Furthermore, we identified a putative novel type of rearrangement in at least one PTC sample. Several PTCs carried a significant number of cells characterized by a trisomy or a tetrasomy of chromosome 10. Overall, the FISH approach in interphase nuclei represents a powerful tool for detecting, at the single cell level, RET/PTC rearrangements and other anomalies involving the RET chromosome region. Copyright © 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first Stakeholder Network Meeting of the EU Horizon 2020-funded ONTOX project was held on 13-14 March 2023, in Brussels, Belgium. The discussion centred around identifying specific challenges, barriers and drivers in relation to the implementation of non-animal new approach methodologies (NAMs) and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), in order to help address the issues and rank them according to their associated level of difficulty. ONTOX aims to advance the assessment of chemical risk to humans, without the use of animal testing, by developing non-animal NAMs and PRA in line with 21st century toxicity testing principles. Stakeholder groups (regulatory authorities, companies, academia, non-governmental organisations) were identified and invited to participate in a meeting and a survey, by which their current position in relation to the implementation of NAMs and PRA was ascertained, as well as specific challenges and drivers highlighted. The survey analysis revealed areas of agreement and disagreement among stakeholders on topics such as capacity building, sustainability, regulatory acceptance, validation of adverse outcome pathways, acceptance of artificial intelligence (AI) in risk assessment, and guaranteeing consumer safety. The stakeholder network meeting resulted in the identification of barriers, drivers and specific challenges that need to be addressed. Breakout groups discussed topics such as hazard versus risk assessment, future reliance on AI and machine learning, regulatory requirements for industry and sustainability of the ONTOX Hub platform. The outputs from these discussions provided insights for overcoming barriers and leveraging drivers for implementing NAMs and PRA. It was concluded that there is a continued need for stakeholder engagement, including the organisation of a 'hackathon' to tackle challenges, to ensure the successful implementation of NAMs and PRA in chemical risk assessment.

The history of the development of the cell transformation assays (CTAs) is described, providing an overview of in vitro cell transformation from its origin to the new transcriptomic-based CTAs. Application of this knowledge is utilized to address how the different types of CTAs, variously addressing initiation and promotion, can be included on a mechanistic basis within the integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) for non-genotoxic carcinogens. Building upon assay assessments targeting the key events in the IATA, we identify how the different CTA models can appropriately fit, following preceding steps in the IATA. The preceding steps are the prescreening transcriptomic approaches, and assessment within the earlier key events of inflammation, immune disruption, mitotic signaling and cell injury. The CTA models address the later key events of (sustained) proliferation and change in morphology leading to tumor formation. The complementary key biomarkers with respect to the precursor key events and respective CTAs are mapped, providing a structured mechanistic approach to represent the complexity of the (non-genotoxic) carcinogenesis process, and specifically their capacity to identify non-genotoxic carcinogenic chemicals in a human relevant IATA.

The rodent cancer bioassay has been the standard approach to fulfill regulatory requirements for assessing human carcinogenic potential of agrochemicals, food additives, industrial chemicals, and pharmaceuticals. Decades of research have described the limitations of the rodent cancer bioassay leading to international initiatives to seek alternatives and establish approaches that modernize carcinogenicity assessment. Biologically relevant approaches can provide mechanistic information and increased efficiency for evaluating hazard and risk of chemical carcinogenicity to humans. The application of human-relevant mechanistic understanding to support new approaches to carcinogenicity assessment will be invaluable for regulatory decision-making. The present work outlines the challenges and opportunities that authorities should consider as they come together to build a roadmap that leads to global acceptance and incorporation of fit-for-purpose, scientifically defensible new approaches for human-relevant carcinogenicity assessment of agrochemicals., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Co-author Jyotigna Mehta reports financial support was provided by ADAMA Agricultural Solutions Ltd. Jyotigna Mehta reports a relationship with ADAMA Agricultural Solutions Ltd that includes: employment. Co-author Douglas C Wolf reports financial support was provided by Syngenta Crop Protection LLC. Douglas C Wolf reports a relationship with Syngenta Crop Protection LLC that includes: employment., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)