Benchmark dose analysis of Ames test data: Identifying appropriate benchmark response values and modeling approaches

As interest in the quantitative interpretation of genotoxicity assay data continues to grow, the Ames bacterial mutagenicity assay offers a valuable opportunity due to its long-standing use and extensive dose-response data sets. A key challenge for the quantitative use of this data is determining how best to apply benchmark dose (BMD) analysis to Ames data to support a quantitative risk assessment. This requires careful selection of both an appropriate benchmark response (BMR) and the most suitable modeling approach. Using a database of Ames bacterial mutagenicity test data from regulatory submissions, we evaluate a range of BMRs and several benchmark modeling approaches. Our evaluation indicates that a 50% increase in revertants over the background (BMR50) is a justifiable, interpretable candidate BMR for Ames studies in the pesticides regulatory context. Furthermore, in the filtered Ames-positive data set, the Bayesian implementations (BMABMDR Laplace approximation and Bridge sampling) yielded BMDLs that met the EFSA criteria for use as a reference point for a larger proportion of data sets and had narrower confidence intervals than the PROAST implementation. Together, these findings provide a practical framework for deriving Ames-based potency estimates to support chemical prioritization, read-across, and quantitative weight-of-evidence assessment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
Published
2026-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2026.106285
Primary Topic
Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Benchmark dose analysis of Ames test data: Identifying appropriate benchmark response values and modeling approaches

Jeannette König, Christian Tobias Willenbockel, Daniel H. Foil, Johannes Kirchmair et al.
3 links
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
article

Benchmark dose analysis of Ames test data: Identifying appropriate benchmark response values and modeling approaches

Jeannette König, Christian Tobias Willenbockel, Daniel H. Foil, Johannes Kirchmair, Carsten Kneuer, Kristin Herrmann
article en

Abstract

As interest in the quantitative interpretation of genotoxicity assay data continues to grow, the Ames bacterial mutagenicity assay offers a valuable opportunity due to its long-standing use and extensive dose-response data sets. A key challenge for the quantitative use of this data is determining how best to apply benchmark dose (BMD) analysis to Ames data to support a quantitative risk assessment. This requires careful selection of both an appropriate benchmark response (BMR) and the most suitable modeling approach. Using a database of Ames bacterial mutagenicity test data from regulatory submissions, we evaluate a range of BMRs and several benchmark modeling approaches. Our evaluation indicates that a 50% increase in revertants over the background (BMR50) is a justifiable, interpretable candidate BMR for Ames studies in the pesticides regulatory context. Furthermore, in the filtered Ames-positive data set, the Bayesian implementations (BMABMDR Laplace approximation and Bridge sampling) yielded BMDLs that met the EFSA criteria for use as a reference point for a larger proportion of data sets and had narrower confidence intervals than the PROAST implementation. Together, these findings provide a practical framework for deriving Ames-based potency estimates to support chemical prioritization, read-across, and quantitative weight-of-evidence assessment.

Regulatory Toxicology and PharmacologyVol. 173
University of Vienna (AT), German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) (DE)
Universität Wien, Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon