Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39262275›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental and molecular mutagenesis2025

Epigenotoxicity: Decoding the epigenetic imprints of genotoxic agents and their implications for regulatory genetic toxicology.

Roger Godschalk, Christopher Faulk, Jessica LaRocca, Jan van Benthem, Francesco Marchetti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental and molecular mutagenesis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Genotoxicity study ofToxicology reports · 2025
    Review
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

5 authors.

Roger GodschalkDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, School for Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9140-0525
Christopher FaulkUniversity of Minnesota, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9749-9658
Jessica LaRoccaCorteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Jan van BenthemNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Francesco MarchettiEnvironmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9435-4867

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regulatory genetic toxicology focuses on DNA damage and subsequent gene mutations. However, genotoxic agents can also affect epigenetic marks, and incorporation of epigenetic data into the regulatory framework may thus enhance the accuracy of risk assessment. Additionally, epigenetic alterations may identify non-genotoxic carcinogens that are not captured with the current battery of tests. Epigenetic alterations could also explain long-term consequences and potential transgenerational effects in the absence of DNA mutations. Therefore, at the 2022 International Workshops on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT) in Ottawa (Ontario, Canada), an expert workgroup explored whether including epigenetic endpoints would improve regulatory genetic toxicology. Here we summarize the presentations and the discussions on technical advancements in assessing epigenetics, how the assessment of epigenetics can enhance strategies for detecting genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens and the correlation between epigenetic alterations with other relevant apical endpoints.

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticMutagensAnimalsCarcinogensDNA DamageHumansMutagenicity TestsRisk AssessmentCarcinogensMutagensepigeneticsgenotoxicityregulatory toxicology

Identifiers

PMID39262275
PMCPMC12988036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.