Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2025

Author Spotlight: Advancing Therapeutics to Treat Vibriosis in Humans and Aquatic Organisms
Published on: May 31, 2024
Structure-mutagenicity relationships on quinoline and indole analogues in the Ames test
Masaki Kurakami1, Atsushi Hakura2, Rika Sato3
1Global Drug Safety, Eisai Co., Ltd., 5-1-3 Tokodai, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki, 300-2635, Japan. m-kurakami@hhc.eisai.co.jp.
Background:
Although the in silico predictive ability of the Ames test results has recently made remarkable progress, there are still some chemical classes for which the predictive ability is not yet sufficient due to a lack of Ames test data. These classes include simple heterocyclic compounds. This study aimed to investigate the mutagenicity and structure-mutagenicity relationships for some heterocycles in the Ames test. In the present study, we selected 12 quinoline analogues containing one or two nitrogen atoms in the naphthalene ring and 12 indole analogues containing one to three nitrogen atoms in the indole ring, without any side moiety.
Results:
The Ames test was performed with five standard bacterial strains (TA100, TA1535, TA98, TA1537, and WP2uvrA) using the pre-incubation method with and without rat liver S9. Five quinoline and two indole analogues were mutagenic. Among the five quinoline analogues, four were mutagenic in the presence of S9 mix with TA100, whereas cinnoline was mutagenic in the absence of S9 mix with TA1537. Among the two indole analogues, indazole was mutagenic in the presence and absence of S9 mix with WP2uvrA and 4-azaindole was mutagenic in the absence of S9 mix with TA1537. The mechanisms underlying the induction of mutagenesis appear to differ between quinoline and indole analogues. In addition, we performed in silico analysis of the mutagenicity of all these analogues using DEREK Nexus 6.1.1 (Lhasa Limited) and GT_EXPERT from CASE Ultra 1.8.0.5 (MultiCASE Inc.) as knowledge-based models and GT1_BMUT from CASE Ultra 1.8.0.5 (MultiCASE Inc.) as a statistical-based model. The knowledge-based model showed low sensitivity for both the quinoline and indole analogues (DEREK Nexus and GT_EXPERT: 20% for quinolines and 0% for indoles). Conversely, the statistical model showed high sensitivity (100% for both quinolines and indoles) and low specificity (43% for quinolines and 10% for indoles).
Conclusion:
Based on the Ames test results, we proposed structural alerts noting that quinoline analogues were mutagenic when they had nitrogens in any of the positions 2, 5, 7, or 8 in addition to 1, and indole analogues were mutagenic when they had nitrogens at positions 2 or 4 in addition to 1.
Related Concept Videos
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity
Physical Properties of Amines
Basicity of Heterocyclic Aromatic Amines
Amines to Sulfonamides: The Hinsberg Test
Generally, a primary amine reacts with the Hinsberg reagent to produce an N-substituted benzenesulfonamide. The electron-withdrawing...
Basicity of Aromatic Amines
Structure of Amines

