The reproducibility of electronic color measurements of the marginal gingiva

Introduction!#!This study evaluated the reproducibility of electronic color determination system evaluations of the marginal gingiva, which could be important for adhesive cervical fillings or prosthetic restorations that imitate the gingiva.!##!Material and methods!#!In 50 subjects, the L*, a*, and b* color coordinates were evaluated five times at a point in the marginal area of a central incisor using different electronic color determination systems: (SP) Shadepilot, (ES) Easyshade, (CE) Crystaleye, and (SV) X-Rite. The mean color difference (ΔE) and its standard deviation between the five measurements from each participant were calculated separately for each device. Further ICC for interdevice reliability was determined.!##!Results!#!The L*, a*, and b* color coordinates and ΔE values differed significantly among the systems (p < 0.001). Within each patient and measurement system, ΔE ranged from 1.4 to 3.2 (SD 1.1-2.5), L* from 2.6 to 5.7 (SD 2.6-5.7), a* from 11.9 to 21.3 (SD 3.6-3.9), and b* from 15.1 to 28.9 (SD 1.7-4.3). Interdevice reliability ranged between 0.675 and 0.807.!##!Conclusions!#!Color determination of the marginal gingiva using the electronic tooth color determination systems tested herein showed limited reproducibility. The results obtained with the different measurement systems differed enormously.!##!Clinical relevance!#!These results show that the electronic color measurement devices tested allow no high reproducible determination of color coordinates of the marginal gingiva

Ochratoxin A: 13-week oral toxicity and cell proliferation in male F344/N rats

Ochratoxin A (OTA) is nephrotoxic and a potent renal carcinogen. Male rats are most susceptible to OTA toxicity, and chronic administration of OTA (70 and 210 mu g/kg bw) for 2 years has been shown to induce high incidences of adenomas and carcinomas arising from the straight segment of the proximal tubule epithelium. In contrast, treatment with a lower dose of 21 mu g/kg bw did not result in increased tumor rates, suggesting a nonlinear dose response for renal tumor formation by OTA. Since the mechanism of OTA carcinogenicity is still largely unknown, this study was conducted to investigate early functional and pathological effects of OTA and to determine if sustained stimulation of renal cell proliferation plays a role. Male F344/N rats were treated with OTA for up to 13 weeks under conditions of the National Toxicology Program (NTP) bioassay. Cell proliferation in the renal cortex and outer stripe of the outer medulla (OSOM) was determined using bromodeoxyuridine incorporation and immunohistochemistry. Histopathological examination showed renal alterations in mid- and high-dose-treated animals involving single-cell death and prominent nuclear enlargement within the straight proximal tubules. Treatment with OTA at doses of 70 and 210 mu g/kg bw led to a marked dose- and time-dependent increase in renal cell proliferation, extending from the medullary rays into the OSOM. No effects were evident in kidneys of low-dose-treated animals or in the liver, which is not a target for OTA carcinogenicity. A no observed effect level in this study was established at 21 mu g/kg bw, correlating with the dose in the NTP 2-year bioassay that did not produce renal tumors. The apparent correlation between enhanced cell turnover and tumor formation induced by OTA indicates that stimulation of cell proliferation may play an important role in OTA carcinogenicity and provides further evidence for an epigenetic, thresholded mechanism

Sustainable development of small towns a Slovenian-Moravian comparative methodological approach =Setrvalý rozvoj malých měst : slovinsko-moravský srovnávací metodologický přístup

172

Performance of Novel Kidney Biomarkers in Preclinical Toxicity Studies

The kidney is one of the main targets of drug toxicity, but early detection of renal damage is often difficult. As part of the InnoMed PredTox project, a collaborative effort aimed at assessing the value of combining omics technologies with conventional toxicology methods for improved preclinical safety assessment, we evaluated the performance of a panel of novel kidney biomarkers in preclinical toxicity studies. Rats were treated with a reference nephrotoxin or one of several proprietary compounds that were dropped from drug development in part due to renal toxicity. Animals were dosed at two dose levels for 1, 3, and 14 days. Putative kidney markers, including kidney injury molecule-1 (Kim-1), lipocalin-2 (Lcn2), clusterin, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1, were analyzed in kidney and urine using quantitative real-time PCR, ELISA, and immunohistochemistry. Changes in gene/protein expression generally correlated well with renal histopathological alterations and were frequently detected at earlier time points or at lower doses than the traditional clinical parameters blood urea nitrogen and serum creatinine. Urinary Kim-1 and clusterin reflected changes in gene/protein expression and histopathological alterations in the target organ in the absence of functional changes. This confirms clusterin and Kim-1 as early and sensitive, noninvasive markers of renal injury. Although Lcn2 did not appear to be specific for kidney toxicity, its rapid response to inflammation and tissue damage in general may suggest its utility in routine toxicity testing

Toxicity of fluoride: critical evaluation of evidence for human developmental neurotoxicity in epidemiological studies, animal experiments and in vitro analyses

Recently, epidemiological studies have suggested that fluoride is a human developmental neurotoxicant that reduces measures of intelligence in children, placing it into the same category as toxic metals (lead, methylmercury, arsenic) and polychlorinated biphenyls. If true, this assessment would be highly relevant considering the widespread fluoridation of drinking water and the worldwide use of fluoride in oral hygiene products such as toothpaste. To gain a deeper understanding of these assertions, we reviewed the levels of human exposure, as well as results from animal experiments, particularly focusing on developmental toxicity, and the molecular mechanisms by which fluoride can cause adverse effects. Moreover, in vitro studies investigating fluoride in neuronal cells and precursor/stem cells were analyzed, and 23 epidemiological studies published since 2012 were considered. The results show that the margin of exposure (MoE) between no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) in animal studies and the current adequate intake (AI) of fluoride (50 µg/kg b.w./day) in humans ranges between 50 and 210, depending on the specific animal experiment used as reference. Even for unusually high fluoride exposure levels, an MoE of at least ten was obtained. Furthermore, concentrations of fluoride in human plasma are much lower than fluoride concentrations, causing effects in cell cultures. In contrast, 21 of 23 recent epidemiological studies report an association between high fluoride exposure and reduced intelligence. The discrepancy between experimental and epidemiological evidence may be reconciled with deficiencies inherent in most of these epidemiological studies on a putative association between fluoride and intelligence, especially with respect to adequate consideration of potential confounding factors, e.g., socioeconomic status, residence, breast feeding, low birth weight, maternal intelligence, and exposure to other neurotoxic chemicals. In conclusion, based on the totality of currently available scientific evidence, the present review does not support the presumption that fluoride should be assessed as a human developmental neurotoxicant at the current exposure levels in Europe

Contribution to the ongoing discussion on fluoride toxicity

Since the addition of fluoride to drinking water in the 1940s, there have been frequent and sometimes heated discussions regarding its benefits and risks. In a recently published review, we addressed the question if current exposure levels in Europe represent a risk to human health. This review was discussed in an editorial asking why we did not calculate benchmark doses (BMD) of fluoride neurotoxicity for humans. Here, we address the question, why it is problematic to calculate BMDs based on the currently available data. Briefly, the conclusions of the available studies are not homogeneous, reporting negative as well as positive results; moreover, the positive studies lack control of confounding factors such as the influence of well-known neurotoxicants. We also discuss the limitations of several further epidemiological studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria of our review. Finally, it is important to not only focus on epidemiological studies. Rather, risk analysis should consider all available data, including epidemiological, animal, as well as in vitro studies. Despite remaining uncertainties, the totality of evidence does not support the notion that fluoride should be considered a human developmental neurotoxicant at current exposure levels in European countries