Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept—A comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity

Based on a production accident Viracept (nelfinavir mesilate) tablets, an HIV protease inhibitor supplied by Roche outside the US, Canada and Japan was contaminated with relatively high levels of ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) for at most 3 months in spring of 2007. On the basis of a wide variety of t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Toxicology letters 2009-11, Vol.190 (3), p.317-329
Hauptverfasser: Müller, Lutz, Gocke, Elmar, Lavé, Thierry, Pfister, Thomas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 329
container_issue 3
container_start_page 317
container_title Toxicology letters
container_volume 190
creator Müller, Lutz
Gocke, Elmar
Lavé, Thierry
Pfister, Thomas
description Based on a production accident Viracept (nelfinavir mesilate) tablets, an HIV protease inhibitor supplied by Roche outside the US, Canada and Japan was contaminated with relatively high levels of ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) for at most 3 months in spring of 2007. On the basis of a wide variety of toxicological data including critical experiments for mutation induction under chronic exposure conditions and cross-species exposure scaling experiments to extrapolate to humans, we estimate the added risk of adverse effects (cancer, birth abnormalities, heritable defects) in any individual patient accidentally exposed to EMS via contaminated Viracept tablets in the context of this production accident as essentially zero. Of critical important for this risk assessment are pivotal in vivo genotoxicity studies (MNT, MutaMouse) providing evidence for ‘hockey-stick’, like dose–response relationships for the risk defining induction of gene mutations and chromosomal damage by EMS [Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., Buergin, H., 2009a. Literature review on the genotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and carcinogenicity of ethyl methanesulfonate. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., 2009b. EMS in Viracept—initial (‘traditional’) assessment of risk to patients based on linear dose response relations. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Ballantyne, M., Whitwell, J., Müller, L., 2009c. MNT and MutaMouse studies to definde the in vivo dose-response relations of the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. Toxicol. Lett.]. As outlined in Gocke and Wall [Gocke, E., Wall, M., 2009. In vivo genotoxicity of EMS: Statistical assessment of the dose response curves. Toxicol. Lett.], several statistical approaches are in support of a threshold model to best fit the data. The presence of clear no effect levels in bone marrow, liver and GI-tract tissue with several dose levels tested below the NOEL permits the calculation of safety factors with considerable confidence. In calculating the ratio of the NOEL dose in the animal studies (25 mg/kg/day) divided by the calculated maximal daily dose of the patients (1068 ppm EMS in 2.92 g Viracept tablets = 2.75 mg EMS or 0.055 mg/kg for a 50 kg person) we derive a safety factor of 454 based on oral intake. Detailed absorption, distribution and metabolism studies in mice, rats and monkeys and with human surrogates in vitro enable us to estimate the safety factors also for the calculated likely highest exposure (AUC and C max) of patients t
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.04.003
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_35055982</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0378427409001878</els_id><sourcerecordid>21217048</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-755a3196acedb7beaa58d80428a851a1d7ce75c692bb553d24d68fea3180b8233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFu1DAURS1ERYfCHyDkFbsEO7YTZ4NUVaUgVWJT2FqO_UI8JPZgO1VHYsFH8IX9krqaQezo6m3OvX7PB6E3lNSU0Pb9ts7hboZcN4T0NeE1IewZ2lDZ9RWjbf8cbQjrZMWbjp-ilyltCSEtb8ULdEp7zhnldIN-XeZpP-MF8qQ9pHUeg9cZcOl2xuU9dh5_c1Eb2OX733_OsQnLLsIEPrlbwNO6aI-jSz-wTglSWsBnPOgEFgeP8xQhTWG22Oqs8Rgi_g4-_C1_hU5GPSd4fZxn6OvHy5uLT9X1l6vPF-fXleFS5qoTQjPat2UJO3QDaC2klYQ3UktBNbWdgU6Ytm-GQQhmG25bOULJSDLIhrEz9O7Qu4vh5wopq8UlA_NcTg5rUkwQIfpCPgU2tKEd4bKA_ACaGFKKMKpddIuOe0WJetSjtuqgRz3qUYSroqfE3h7712EB-y909FGADwcAynfcOogqGQe-HO4imKxscP9_4QGSKKdh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>21217048</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept—A comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Müller, Lutz ; Gocke, Elmar ; Lavé, Thierry ; Pfister, Thomas</creator><creatorcontrib>Müller, Lutz ; Gocke, Elmar ; Lavé, Thierry ; Pfister, Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>Based on a production accident Viracept (nelfinavir mesilate) tablets, an HIV protease inhibitor supplied by Roche outside the US, Canada and Japan was contaminated with relatively high levels of ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) for at most 3 months in spring of 2007. On the basis of a wide variety of toxicological data including critical experiments for mutation induction under chronic exposure conditions and cross-species exposure scaling experiments to extrapolate to humans, we estimate the added risk of adverse effects (cancer, birth abnormalities, heritable defects) in any individual patient accidentally exposed to EMS via contaminated Viracept tablets in the context of this production accident as essentially zero. Of critical important for this risk assessment are pivotal in vivo genotoxicity studies (MNT, MutaMouse) providing evidence for ‘hockey-stick’, like dose–response relationships for the risk defining induction of gene mutations and chromosomal damage by EMS [Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., Buergin, H., 2009a. Literature review on the genotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and carcinogenicity of ethyl methanesulfonate. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., 2009b. EMS in Viracept—initial (‘traditional’) assessment of risk to patients based on linear dose response relations. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Ballantyne, M., Whitwell, J., Müller, L., 2009c. MNT and MutaMouse studies to definde the in vivo dose-response relations of the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. Toxicol. Lett.]. As outlined in Gocke and Wall [Gocke, E., Wall, M., 2009. In vivo genotoxicity of EMS: Statistical assessment of the dose response curves. Toxicol. Lett.], several statistical approaches are in support of a threshold model to best fit the data. The presence of clear no effect levels in bone marrow, liver and GI-tract tissue with several dose levels tested below the NOEL permits the calculation of safety factors with considerable confidence. In calculating the ratio of the NOEL dose in the animal studies (25 mg/kg/day) divided by the calculated maximal daily dose of the patients (1068 ppm EMS in 2.92 g Viracept tablets = 2.75 mg EMS or 0.055 mg/kg for a 50 kg person) we derive a safety factor of 454 based on oral intake. Detailed absorption, distribution and metabolism studies in mice, rats and monkeys and with human surrogates in vitro enable us to estimate the safety factors also for the calculated likely highest exposure (AUC and C max) of patients to EMS [Lave, T., Birnböck, H., Götschi, A., Ramp, T., Pähler, A., 2009a. In vivo and in vitro characterization of ethyl methanesulfonate pharmacokinetics in animals and in human. Toxicol. Lett.; Lave, T., Paehler, A., Grimm, H.P., 2009b. Modelling of patient EMS exposure: translating pharmacokinetics of EMS in vitro and in animals into patients. Toxicol. Lett.]. We calculate the total exposure (AUC) based safety factor to amount to at least 28. This lower value is due to the conservative prediction of a longer half-life of EMS in man versus mouse, rat and monkey. Based on the estimated human C max the safety factor for affected Viracept patients is calculated to be 370, as C max is mainly dependent on volume of distribution, which is not much different for EMS in different species. We consider that the total exposure based safety factor constitutes a minimal value since the considerations regarding evidence of error-free repair at sub-threshold concentrations argues in favor of using the highest EMS concentration ( C max) rather than the AUC as basis for risk assessment. The ‘true value’ very likely lies somewhere between these two numbers as aspects such as repair enzyme availability and status of the cell cycle relative to the insult are important parameters that may not fully support safety factors based solely on C max estimates. Potential adverse effects of EMS such as cancer, birth abnormalities and heritable effects are considered to be sequelae of its genotoxic activity. Hence, the thresholded dose–response relationships should also apply to these endpoints. We also provide a comprehensive discussion of the specific disease situation of the HIV infected target population and potential influences of co-medications on the susceptibilities and repair capacities of EMS induced DNA lesions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0378-4274</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-3169</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.04.003</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19443141</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Alkylating Agents - analysis ; Alkylating Agents - pharmacokinetics ; Alkylating Agents - toxicity ; Animals ; AUC ; Birth defects ; Cancer ; Cmax ; Contamination ; DNA adducts ; DNA repair ; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug ; Drug Contamination ; Environmental Exposure ; Ethyl methanesulfonate ; Ethyl Methanesulfonate - analysis ; Ethyl Methanesulfonate - pharmacokinetics ; Ethyl Methanesulfonate - toxicity ; Ethyl valine adducts ; HIV Protease Inhibitors - chemistry ; Humans ; MGMT ; Mice ; Mutagens - analysis ; Mutagens - pharmacokinetics ; Mutagens - toxicity ; Mutation - drug effects ; Mutation threshold ; Nelfinavir - chemistry ; Neoplasms - chemically induced ; No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level ; Patient exposure risk ; Rats ; Reproduction - drug effects ; Risk Assessment ; Toxicity Tests ; Viracept</subject><ispartof>Toxicology letters, 2009-11, Vol.190 (3), p.317-329</ispartof><rights>2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-755a3196acedb7beaa58d80428a851a1d7ce75c692bb553d24d68fea3180b8233</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378427409001878$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19443141$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Müller, Lutz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gocke, Elmar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lavé, Thierry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pfister, Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept—A comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity</title><title>Toxicology letters</title><addtitle>Toxicol Lett</addtitle><description>Based on a production accident Viracept (nelfinavir mesilate) tablets, an HIV protease inhibitor supplied by Roche outside the US, Canada and Japan was contaminated with relatively high levels of ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) for at most 3 months in spring of 2007. On the basis of a wide variety of toxicological data including critical experiments for mutation induction under chronic exposure conditions and cross-species exposure scaling experiments to extrapolate to humans, we estimate the added risk of adverse effects (cancer, birth abnormalities, heritable defects) in any individual patient accidentally exposed to EMS via contaminated Viracept tablets in the context of this production accident as essentially zero. Of critical important for this risk assessment are pivotal in vivo genotoxicity studies (MNT, MutaMouse) providing evidence for ‘hockey-stick’, like dose–response relationships for the risk defining induction of gene mutations and chromosomal damage by EMS [Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., Buergin, H., 2009a. Literature review on the genotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and carcinogenicity of ethyl methanesulfonate. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., 2009b. EMS in Viracept—initial (‘traditional’) assessment of risk to patients based on linear dose response relations. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Ballantyne, M., Whitwell, J., Müller, L., 2009c. MNT and MutaMouse studies to definde the in vivo dose-response relations of the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. Toxicol. Lett.]. As outlined in Gocke and Wall [Gocke, E., Wall, M., 2009. In vivo genotoxicity of EMS: Statistical assessment of the dose response curves. Toxicol. Lett.], several statistical approaches are in support of a threshold model to best fit the data. The presence of clear no effect levels in bone marrow, liver and GI-tract tissue with several dose levels tested below the NOEL permits the calculation of safety factors with considerable confidence. In calculating the ratio of the NOEL dose in the animal studies (25 mg/kg/day) divided by the calculated maximal daily dose of the patients (1068 ppm EMS in 2.92 g Viracept tablets = 2.75 mg EMS or 0.055 mg/kg for a 50 kg person) we derive a safety factor of 454 based on oral intake. Detailed absorption, distribution and metabolism studies in mice, rats and monkeys and with human surrogates in vitro enable us to estimate the safety factors also for the calculated likely highest exposure (AUC and C max) of patients to EMS [Lave, T., Birnböck, H., Götschi, A., Ramp, T., Pähler, A., 2009a. In vivo and in vitro characterization of ethyl methanesulfonate pharmacokinetics in animals and in human. Toxicol. Lett.; Lave, T., Paehler, A., Grimm, H.P., 2009b. Modelling of patient EMS exposure: translating pharmacokinetics of EMS in vitro and in animals into patients. Toxicol. Lett.]. We calculate the total exposure (AUC) based safety factor to amount to at least 28. This lower value is due to the conservative prediction of a longer half-life of EMS in man versus mouse, rat and monkey. Based on the estimated human C max the safety factor for affected Viracept patients is calculated to be 370, as C max is mainly dependent on volume of distribution, which is not much different for EMS in different species. We consider that the total exposure based safety factor constitutes a minimal value since the considerations regarding evidence of error-free repair at sub-threshold concentrations argues in favor of using the highest EMS concentration ( C max) rather than the AUC as basis for risk assessment. The ‘true value’ very likely lies somewhere between these two numbers as aspects such as repair enzyme availability and status of the cell cycle relative to the insult are important parameters that may not fully support safety factors based solely on C max estimates. Potential adverse effects of EMS such as cancer, birth abnormalities and heritable effects are considered to be sequelae of its genotoxic activity. Hence, the thresholded dose–response relationships should also apply to these endpoints. We also provide a comprehensive discussion of the specific disease situation of the HIV infected target population and potential influences of co-medications on the susceptibilities and repair capacities of EMS induced DNA lesions.</description><subject>Alkylating Agents - analysis</subject><subject>Alkylating Agents - pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Alkylating Agents - toxicity</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>AUC</subject><subject>Birth defects</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cmax</subject><subject>Contamination</subject><subject>DNA adducts</subject><subject>DNA repair</subject><subject>Dose-Response Relationship, Drug</subject><subject>Drug Contamination</subject><subject>Environmental Exposure</subject><subject>Ethyl methanesulfonate</subject><subject>Ethyl Methanesulfonate - analysis</subject><subject>Ethyl Methanesulfonate - pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Ethyl Methanesulfonate - toxicity</subject><subject>Ethyl valine adducts</subject><subject>HIV Protease Inhibitors - chemistry</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>MGMT</subject><subject>Mice</subject><subject>Mutagens - analysis</subject><subject>Mutagens - pharmacokinetics</subject><subject>Mutagens - toxicity</subject><subject>Mutation - drug effects</subject><subject>Mutation threshold</subject><subject>Nelfinavir - chemistry</subject><subject>Neoplasms - chemically induced</subject><subject>No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level</subject><subject>Patient exposure risk</subject><subject>Rats</subject><subject>Reproduction - drug effects</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Toxicity Tests</subject><subject>Viracept</subject><issn>0378-4274</issn><issn>1879-3169</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkcFu1DAURS1ERYfCHyDkFbsEO7YTZ4NUVaUgVWJT2FqO_UI8JPZgO1VHYsFH8IX9krqaQezo6m3OvX7PB6E3lNSU0Pb9ts7hboZcN4T0NeE1IewZ2lDZ9RWjbf8cbQjrZMWbjp-ilyltCSEtb8ULdEp7zhnldIN-XeZpP-MF8qQ9pHUeg9cZcOl2xuU9dh5_c1Eb2OX733_OsQnLLsIEPrlbwNO6aI-jSz-wTglSWsBnPOgEFgeP8xQhTWG22Oqs8Rgi_g4-_C1_hU5GPSd4fZxn6OvHy5uLT9X1l6vPF-fXleFS5qoTQjPat2UJO3QDaC2klYQ3UktBNbWdgU6Ytm-GQQhmG25bOULJSDLIhrEz9O7Qu4vh5wopq8UlA_NcTg5rUkwQIfpCPgU2tKEd4bKA_ACaGFKKMKpddIuOe0WJetSjtuqgRz3qUYSroqfE3h7712EB-y909FGADwcAynfcOogqGQe-HO4imKxscP9_4QGSKKdh</recordid><startdate>20091112</startdate><enddate>20091112</enddate><creator>Müller, Lutz</creator><creator>Gocke, Elmar</creator><creator>Lavé, Thierry</creator><creator>Pfister, Thomas</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20091112</creationdate><title>Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept—A comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity</title><author>Müller, Lutz ; Gocke, Elmar ; Lavé, Thierry ; Pfister, Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-755a3196acedb7beaa58d80428a851a1d7ce75c692bb553d24d68fea3180b8233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Alkylating Agents - analysis</topic><topic>Alkylating Agents - pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Alkylating Agents - toxicity</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>AUC</topic><topic>Birth defects</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cmax</topic><topic>Contamination</topic><topic>DNA adducts</topic><topic>DNA repair</topic><topic>Dose-Response Relationship, Drug</topic><topic>Drug Contamination</topic><topic>Environmental Exposure</topic><topic>Ethyl methanesulfonate</topic><topic>Ethyl Methanesulfonate - analysis</topic><topic>Ethyl Methanesulfonate - pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Ethyl Methanesulfonate - toxicity</topic><topic>Ethyl valine adducts</topic><topic>HIV Protease Inhibitors - chemistry</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>MGMT</topic><topic>Mice</topic><topic>Mutagens - analysis</topic><topic>Mutagens - pharmacokinetics</topic><topic>Mutagens - toxicity</topic><topic>Mutation - drug effects</topic><topic>Mutation threshold</topic><topic>Nelfinavir - chemistry</topic><topic>Neoplasms - chemically induced</topic><topic>No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level</topic><topic>Patient exposure risk</topic><topic>Rats</topic><topic>Reproduction - drug effects</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Toxicity Tests</topic><topic>Viracept</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Müller, Lutz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gocke, Elmar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lavé, Thierry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pfister, Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Toxicology letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Müller, Lutz</au><au>Gocke, Elmar</au><au>Lavé, Thierry</au><au>Pfister, Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept—A comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity</atitle><jtitle>Toxicology letters</jtitle><addtitle>Toxicol Lett</addtitle><date>2009-11-12</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>190</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>317</spage><epage>329</epage><pages>317-329</pages><issn>0378-4274</issn><eissn>1879-3169</eissn><abstract>Based on a production accident Viracept (nelfinavir mesilate) tablets, an HIV protease inhibitor supplied by Roche outside the US, Canada and Japan was contaminated with relatively high levels of ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) for at most 3 months in spring of 2007. On the basis of a wide variety of toxicological data including critical experiments for mutation induction under chronic exposure conditions and cross-species exposure scaling experiments to extrapolate to humans, we estimate the added risk of adverse effects (cancer, birth abnormalities, heritable defects) in any individual patient accidentally exposed to EMS via contaminated Viracept tablets in the context of this production accident as essentially zero. Of critical important for this risk assessment are pivotal in vivo genotoxicity studies (MNT, MutaMouse) providing evidence for ‘hockey-stick’, like dose–response relationships for the risk defining induction of gene mutations and chromosomal damage by EMS [Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., Buergin, H., 2009a. Literature review on the genotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and carcinogenicity of ethyl methanesulfonate. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Pfister, T., 2009b. EMS in Viracept—initial (‘traditional’) assessment of risk to patients based on linear dose response relations. Toxicol. Lett.; Gocke, E., Müller, L., Ballantyne, M., Whitwell, J., Müller, L., 2009c. MNT and MutaMouse studies to definde the in vivo dose-response relations of the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU. Toxicol. Lett.]. As outlined in Gocke and Wall [Gocke, E., Wall, M., 2009. In vivo genotoxicity of EMS: Statistical assessment of the dose response curves. Toxicol. Lett.], several statistical approaches are in support of a threshold model to best fit the data. The presence of clear no effect levels in bone marrow, liver and GI-tract tissue with several dose levels tested below the NOEL permits the calculation of safety factors with considerable confidence. In calculating the ratio of the NOEL dose in the animal studies (25 mg/kg/day) divided by the calculated maximal daily dose of the patients (1068 ppm EMS in 2.92 g Viracept tablets = 2.75 mg EMS or 0.055 mg/kg for a 50 kg person) we derive a safety factor of 454 based on oral intake. Detailed absorption, distribution and metabolism studies in mice, rats and monkeys and with human surrogates in vitro enable us to estimate the safety factors also for the calculated likely highest exposure (AUC and C max) of patients to EMS [Lave, T., Birnböck, H., Götschi, A., Ramp, T., Pähler, A., 2009a. In vivo and in vitro characterization of ethyl methanesulfonate pharmacokinetics in animals and in human. Toxicol. Lett.; Lave, T., Paehler, A., Grimm, H.P., 2009b. Modelling of patient EMS exposure: translating pharmacokinetics of EMS in vitro and in animals into patients. Toxicol. Lett.]. We calculate the total exposure (AUC) based safety factor to amount to at least 28. This lower value is due to the conservative prediction of a longer half-life of EMS in man versus mouse, rat and monkey. Based on the estimated human C max the safety factor for affected Viracept patients is calculated to be 370, as C max is mainly dependent on volume of distribution, which is not much different for EMS in different species. We consider that the total exposure based safety factor constitutes a minimal value since the considerations regarding evidence of error-free repair at sub-threshold concentrations argues in favor of using the highest EMS concentration ( C max) rather than the AUC as basis for risk assessment. The ‘true value’ very likely lies somewhere between these two numbers as aspects such as repair enzyme availability and status of the cell cycle relative to the insult are important parameters that may not fully support safety factors based solely on C max estimates. Potential adverse effects of EMS such as cancer, birth abnormalities and heritable effects are considered to be sequelae of its genotoxic activity. Hence, the thresholded dose–response relationships should also apply to these endpoints. We also provide a comprehensive discussion of the specific disease situation of the HIV infected target population and potential influences of co-medications on the susceptibilities and repair capacities of EMS induced DNA lesions.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>19443141</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.04.003</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0378-4274
ispartof Toxicology letters, 2009-11, Vol.190 (3), p.317-329
issn 0378-4274
1879-3169
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_35055982
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Alkylating Agents - analysis
Alkylating Agents - pharmacokinetics
Alkylating Agents - toxicity
Animals
AUC
Birth defects
Cancer
Cmax
Contamination
DNA adducts
DNA repair
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Drug Contamination
Environmental Exposure
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl Methanesulfonate - analysis
Ethyl Methanesulfonate - pharmacokinetics
Ethyl Methanesulfonate - toxicity
Ethyl valine adducts
HIV Protease Inhibitors - chemistry
Humans
MGMT
Mice
Mutagens - analysis
Mutagens - pharmacokinetics
Mutagens - toxicity
Mutation - drug effects
Mutation threshold
Nelfinavir - chemistry
Neoplasms - chemically induced
No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level
Patient exposure risk
Rats
Reproduction - drug effects
Risk Assessment
Toxicity Tests
Viracept
title Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept—A comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T04%3A08%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ethyl%20methanesulfonate%20toxicity%20in%20Viracept%E2%80%94A%20comprehensive%20human%20risk%20assessment%20based%20on%20threshold%20data%20for%20genotoxicity&rft.jtitle=Toxicology%20letters&rft.au=M%C3%BCller,%20Lutz&rft.date=2009-11-12&rft.volume=190&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=317&rft.epage=329&rft.pages=317-329&rft.issn=0378-4274&rft.eissn=1879-3169&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.04.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E21217048%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=21217048&rft_id=info:pmid/19443141&rft_els_id=S0378427409001878&rfr_iscdi=true