ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
After a Century of Research into Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens, Where Do We Stand?
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of different mutagens in tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa) cut flower.Transgenic research · 2026Article
- Harnessing archaeogenetic for cancer therapy: bridging ancient DNA insights with modern therapeutic innovations.Clinical epigenetics · 2026Review
- DNA damage response inhibition is an early event in cadmium-induced breast carcinogenesis.Toxicology and applied pharmacology · 2025Article
- The Human Genome Organisation (HUGO) and a vision for Ecogenomics: the Ecological Genome Project.Human genomics · 2023Review
- Applications of advanced technologies for detecting genomic structural variation.Mutation research. Reviews in mutation researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer is one of the longest-known human diseases, yet only in recent times have we begun to perceive that the percentage of neoplasms caused by environmental factors, lifestyle and chemicals, is likely underestimated. The first medical reports associating cancer with pollutants like tars appeared by the early 20th century, but despite initial evidence relating oncogenesis and chromosomal alterations, only after the structure of DNA had been elucidated in the 1950s have genetic disorders been fully perceived as cause. This led to a growing interest in genotoxic and mutagenic pollutants. Even though we are now familiar with a range of environmental carcinogens spanning between aromatic hydrocarbons and asbestos to radionuclides and forms of carbon nanomaterials, establishing causal networks between pollutants and cancer remains cumbersome. In most part, this is due to the complexity of toxicant matrices, unknown modes-of-action of chemicals or their mixtures, the widening array of novel pollutants plus difficulties in subtracting background effects from true aetiology of disease. Recent advances in analytical chemistry, high-throughput toxicology, next-generation sequencing, computational biology and databases that allocate whole normal and cancer genomes, all indicate that we are on the verge of a new age of research into mechanistic 'oncotoxicology', but how can it impact risk assessment and prevention?
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.