Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35302169›Full record

ArticleMutagenesis2022

The BlueScreen HC assay to predict the genotoxic potential of fragrance materials.

Yax Thakkar, Kaushal Joshi, Christina Hickey, Joseph Wahler, Brian Wall, Sylvain Etter, Benjamin Smith, Peter Griem, Matthew Tate, Frank Jones and 8 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mutagenesis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
78.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 372 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Advances in Cytotoxicity Testing: From In Vitro Assays to In Silico Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 15 institutions in 6 countries.

Yax ThakkarResearch Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc., 50 Tice Blvd, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677, United States.
Kaushal JoshiResearch Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc., 50 Tice Blvd, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677, United States.
Christina HickeyFirmenich, Inc., 250 Plainsboro Rd, Plainsboro Township, NJ 08536, United States.
Joseph WahlerResearch Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc., 50 Tice Blvd, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677, United States.
Brian WallGlobal Product Safety, Colgate-Palmolive Company, 909 River Rd, Piscataway, NJ 08854, United States.
Sylvain EtterFirmenich, Inc., Rue de la Bergère 7, 1242 Satigny, Switzerland.
Benjamin SmithInnovations in Food & Chemical Safety Programme, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), 1, #20-10 Fusionopolis Way, Connexis, North Tower, 138632, Singapore.
Peter GriemSymrise AG, Mühlenfeldstr 1, 37603, Holzminden, Niedersachsen, Germany.
Matthew TateGentronix, Alderley Edge, Macclesfield SK10 4TG, United Kingdom.
Frank JonesSC Johnson, 1525 Howe St, Racine, WI 53403, United States.
Gladys OudraogoL'Oreal Life Sciences Research, 1, Av Eugene Schueller 93600 Aulnay sous Bois, France.
Stefan PfuhlerThe Procter & Gamble Company, Mason Business Centre, Mason, OH, United States.
Christopher ChoiTakasago, 4 Volvo Dr, Rockleigh, NJ 07647, United States.
Gary WilliamsNew York Medical College, 40 Sunshine Cottage Rd, Valhalla, NY 10595, United States.
Helmut GreimTechnical University of Munich, Arcisstraße 21, 80333 München, Germany.
Gerhard EisenbrandUniversity of Kaiserslautern, Erwin-Schrödinger-Straße 52, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany (Retired).
Wolfgang DekantDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology of the University of Würzburg, Sanderring 2, 97070 Würzburg, Germany.
Anne Marie ApiResearch Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc., 50 Tice Blvd, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677, United States.
Research Institute for Fragrance Materials · USAgency for Science, Technology and Research · SGColgate-Palmolive (United States) · USFirmenich (Switzerland) · CHFirmenich (United States) · USGentronix (United Kingdom) · GBL'Oréal (France) · FRNew York Medical College · USProcter & Gamble (United States) · USSC Johnson (United States) · USSymrise (Germany) · DETakasago (United States) · USTechnical University of Munich · DEUniversity of Kaiserslautern · DEUniversity of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BlueScreen HC is a mammalian cell-based assay for measuring the genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of chemical compounds and mixtures. The BlueScreen HC assay has been utilized at the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials in a safety assessment program as a screening tool to prioritize fragrance materials for higher-tier testing, as supporting evidence when using a read-across approach, and as evidence to adjust the threshold of toxicological concern. Predictive values for the BlueScreen HC assay were evaluated based on the ability of the assay to predict the outcome of in vitro and in vivo mutagenicity and chromosomal damage genotoxicity assays. A set of 371 fragrance materials was assessed in the BlueScreen HC assay along with existing or newly generated in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity data. Based on a weight-of-evidence approach, the majority of materials in the data set were deemed negative and concluded not to have the potential to be genotoxic, while only a small proportion of materials were determined to show genotoxic effects in these assays. Analysis of the data set showed a combination of high positive agreement but low negative agreement between BlueScreen HC results, in vitro regulatory genotoxicity assays, and higher-tier test results. The BlueScreen HC assay did not generate any false negatives, thereby providing robustness when utilizing it as a high-throughput screening tool to evaluate the large inventory of fragrance materials. From the perspective of protecting public health, it is desirable to have no or minimal false negatives, as a false-negative result may incorrectly indicate the lack of a genotoxicity hazard. However, the assay did have a high percentage of false-positive results, resulting in poor positive predictivity of the in vitro genotoxicity test battery outcome. Overall, the assay generated 100% negative predictivity and 3.9% positive predictivity. In addition to the data set of 371 fragrance materials, 30 natural complex substances were evaluated for BlueScreen HC, Ames, and in vitro micronucleus assay, and a good correlation in all three assays was observed. Overall, while a positive result may have to be further investigated, these findings suggest that the BlueScreen HC assay can be a valuable screening tool to detect the genotoxic potential of fragrance materials and mixtures.

Indexed as

DNA DamageOdorantsAnimalsBiological AssayMammalsMutagenicity TestsMutagensMutagensBlueScreenfragrance materialsgenotoxicity

Identifiers

PMID35302169
PMCPMC8976226
OpenAlexW4210439043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.