ReviewNeurotoxicity research2026
From In Vitro Genotoxicity Assays to Human Biomarkers: Interpreting DNA Damage Signals in Long-Term SSRI Therapy through a Translational Neurotoxicology Lens.
Review in Neurotoxicity research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are among the most frequently prescribed long-term neuropsychiatric medications, making any potential impact on genomic stability a clinically relevant safety question. Interpreting an SSRI “genotoxicity signal,” however, is challenging because evidence spans heterogeneous endpoints (DNA strand breaks, oxidative base lesions, micronuclei/chromosomal damage, and DNA-damage response markers) and experimental systems with widely different exposure conditions. In this translational review, we synthesize in vitro, in vivo, and human biomarker evidence to clarify what reported DNA-damage findings do—and do not—imply for chronic SSRI therapy. Across cell-based models, several SSRIs can induce oxidative stress–linked DNA-damage endpoints and DNA-damage response activation, but these effects commonly emerge at micromolar concentrations that are supratherapeutic and/or near cytotoxicity thresholds, and their magnitude can vary with metabolic competence and exposure design. Animal studies show mixed outcomes, including endpoint discordance between comet and micronucleus assays and occasional evidence of clastogenic or aneugenic effects under specific dosing regimens, limiting generalization from any single positive finding. Human biomarker studies are the most direct evidence for clinical relevance but remain limited and sensitive to confounding by indication. Available data are more consistent with an absence of a robust, clinically meaningful peripheral-blood genotoxic signal during SSRI therapy, while acknowledging scarce longitudinal follow-up, heterogeneous endpoints, and incomplete control for disease state, lifestyle, and co-medications. We propose an “interpretation ladder” to reconcile discrepancies across evidence streams and outline priorities for future research, including therapeutically relevant exposure modeling (with attention to unbound exposure), standardized reporting and quality practices, and well-controlled multi-endpoint longitudinal cohorts with transparent data sharing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42024228What 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.