IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0136764.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Genomics Platform and Statistical Filtering on Transcriptional Benchmark Doses (BMD) and Multiple Approaches for Selection of Chemical Point of Departure (PoD)

Author

Listed:
  • A Francina Webster
  • Nikolai Chepelev
  • Rémi Gagné
  • Byron Kuo
  • Leslie Recio
  • Andrew Williams
  • Carole L Yauk

Abstract

Many regulatory agencies are exploring ways to integrate toxicogenomic data into their chemical risk assessments. The major challenge lies in determining how to distill the complex data produced by high-content, multi-dose gene expression studies into quantitative information. It has been proposed that benchmark dose (BMD) values derived from toxicogenomics data be used as point of departure (PoD) values in chemical risk assessments. However, there is limited information regarding which genomics platforms are most suitable and how to select appropriate PoD values. In this study, we compared BMD values modeled from RNA sequencing-, microarray-, and qPCR-derived gene expression data from a single study, and explored multiple approaches for selecting a single PoD from these data. The strategies evaluated include several that do not require prior mechanistic knowledge of the compound for selection of the PoD, thus providing approaches for assessing data-poor chemicals. We used RNA extracted from the livers of female mice exposed to non-carcinogenic (0, 2 mg/kg/day, mkd) and carcinogenic (4, 8 mkd) doses of furan for 21 days. We show that transcriptional BMD values were consistent across technologies and highly predictive of the two-year cancer bioassay-based PoD. We also demonstrate that filtering data based on statistically significant changes in gene expression prior to BMD modeling creates more conservative BMD values. Taken together, this case study on mice exposed to furan demonstrates that high-content toxicogenomics studies produce robust data for BMD modelling that are minimally affected by inter-technology variability and highly predictive of cancer-based PoD doses.

Suggested Citation

  • A Francina Webster & Nikolai Chepelev & Rémi Gagné & Byron Kuo & Leslie Recio & Andrew Williams & Carole L Yauk, 2015. "Impact of Genomics Platform and Statistical Filtering on Transcriptional Benchmark Doses (BMD) and Multiple Approaches for Selection of Chemical Point of Departure (PoD)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0136764
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136764
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136764
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136764&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0136764?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reuben Thomas & Russell S Thomas & Scott S Auerbach & Christopher J Portier, 2013. "Biological Networks for Predicting Chemical Hepatocarcinogenicity Using Gene Expression Data from Treated Mice and Relevance across Human and Rat Species," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-10, May.
    2. Michael Römer & Johannes Eichner & Ute Metzger & Markus F Templin & Simon Plummer & Heidrun Ellinger-Ziegelbauer & Andreas Zell, 2014. "Cross-Platform Toxicogenomics for the Prediction of Non-Genotoxic Hepatocarcinogenesis in Rat," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-16, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0136764. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.