Genotoxicity Screening
Genotoxicity Screening - Related Videos
09:44
High-throughput Screening for Chemical Modulators of Post-transcriptionally Regulated Genes
0 Views •
2015
Here we describe a cell-based reporter gene assay as a valuable tool to screen chemical libraries for compounds modulating post-transcriptional control mechanisms exerted through 3’ UTR.
08:21
Cell Cycle-specific Measurement of γH2AX and Apoptosis After Genotoxic Stress by Flow Cytometry
0 Views •
Cited by 8 •
2019
The presented method combines the quantitative analysis of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), cell cycle distribution and apoptosis to enable cell cycle-specific evaluation of DSB induction and repair as well as the consequences of repair failure.
08:50
Genetic Screens
0 Views •
2023
Genetic screens are critical tools for defining gene function and understanding gene interactions. Screens typically involve mutating genes and then assessing the affected organisms for phenotypes of interest. The process can be “forward”, where mutations are generated randomly to identify unknown genes responsible for the phenotypes, or it can be “reverse”, where specific genes are targeted for mutation to observe what phenotypes are produced.Here, JoVE reviews various types of genetic...
08:10
Multi-enzyme Screening Using a High-throughput Genetic Enzyme Screening System
0 Views •
Cited by 7 •
2016
This work presents a method of high-throughput screening using a universal genetic enzyme screening system that can be theoretically applied to over 200 enzymes. Here, the single screening system identifies three different enzymes (lipase, cellulase, and alkaline phosphatase) by simply changing the substrate used (p-nitrophenyl acetate, p-nitrophenyl-β-D-cellobioside, and phenyl phosphate).
08:25
Advanced 3D Liver Models for In vitro Genotoxicity Testing Following Long-Term Nanomaterial Exposure
0 Views •
Cited by 21 •
2020
This procedure was established to be used for developing advanced 3D hepatic cultures in vitro, which can provide a more physiologically relevant assessment of the genotoxic hazards associated with nanomaterial exposures over both an acute or long-term, repeated dose regimes.
FAQs
A dose-dependent pattern means that the hazard identified by the screen changes with the exposure level tested. This relationship helps distinguish conditions associated with lower or higher concern, rather than treating every result as equivalent. In bioengineering, it can guide decisions about material design and processing conditions.
Different readouts capture different forms of genetic damage, so a single assay may not represent the entire screening picture. Bacterial mutation testing addresses mutation in bacteria, the comet assay measures altered DNA migration associated with strand breaks, and micronucleus formation identifies chromosomal damage in dividing cells. Together, these endpoints broaden interpretation of a test material's effects.
The comet assay contributes a DNA strand-break perspective by examining altered DNA migration. That readout differs from bacterial mutation results and micronucleus formation, which address mutation or chromosomal damage, respectively. Using the assay within a broader panel can show whether an exposure is associated with strand-break evidence rather than relying on one genetic endpoint.
Findings can guide changes to material design when a biomaterial or related product produces evidence of genetic damage. They can also prompt evaluation of process conditions, because screening results may inform both design and processing. This creates a safety-focused feedback loop before further development of the bioengineered product.
Candidate products include tissue-engineered materials, nanoparticles, drug-delivery systems, and engineered-cell products. The same screening purpose applies more broadly to chemicals, biomaterials, drugs, and other exposures. Testing these categories helps identify hazards to genetic material while products are being assessed for biological safety and before further development.
Screening is positioned before further development, making it an early safety checkpoint rather than only a final evaluation. For therapeutic candidates, results can support decisions about whether to pursue use and whether follow-up safety testing is needed. This timing allows detected hazards to influence development choices before substantial progression.