ReviewEnvironmental and molecular mutagenesis2025
Review of Transcriptomic Biomarkers That Predict In Vitro Genotoxicity in Human Cell Lines.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing genotoxicity assessment with transcriptomic biomarkers: from 2D to 3D HepaRG spheroid models.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026Article
- Review of Transcriptomic Biomarkers That Predict In Vitro Genotoxicity in Human Cell Lines.Environmental and molecular mutagenesis · 2025Review
- Consensus findings of an International Workshops on Genotoxicity Testing workshop on using transcriptomic biomarkers to predict genotoxicity.Environmental and molecular mutagenesis · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The current genotoxicity testing paradigm provides little mechanistic information, has poor specificity in predicting carcinogenicity in humans, and is not suited to assessing a large number of chemicals. Genomic technologies enable the characterization of genome-wide transcriptional changes in response to chemical treatments that can inform mechanisms or modes of action. These technologies provided an impetus to develop transcriptomic biomarkers that could transform genotoxicity hazard assessment for drugs, cosmetics, and environmental and industrial chemicals. In August 2022, the International Workshops on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT) held a workshop to critically review progress in the development and application of transcriptomic biomarkers in genotoxicity testing. Here, we describe the findings of this workshop's subgroup that conducted a systematized review and analysis of in vitro transcriptomic biomarkers for evaluating genotoxicity. Although there is a multitude of published reports exploring transcriptomics in genetic toxicology, the working group identified only five in vitro transcriptomic biomarker candidates, of which three (GENOMARK, TGx-DDI, and MU2012) were independently developed with sufficiently defined context of use, validation data, and supporting case studies that warranted inclusion in the review. Although these in vitro biomarkers were developed independently and for different classes of chemicals (TGx-DDI for pharmaceuticals, GENOMARK for cosmetics, and MU2012 for medical and environmental chemicals), they all address the same shortfall of the standard in vitro genotoxicity testing battery, that is, lack of specificity by genotoxicity-induced stress response at the transcriptomic level. In this review, we discuss the development of these in vitro biomarkers, including challenges and progress toward achieving regulatory acceptance.
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.