Is micronucleus assay in oral exfoliated cells a useful biomarker for biomonitoring populations exposed to pesticides? A systematic review with meta-analysis

Could fluoride be considered a genotoxic chemical agent in vivo? A systematic review with meta-analysis

The goal of this study was to perform systematic review (SR) to investigate the scientific literature regarding the genotoxicity effects of fluoride exposure (FE). The search of databases used for this study was PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS and Web of Science. The quality of included studies was assessed using the EPHPP (Effective Public Health Practice Project). A total of 20 potentially relevant studies were selected for evaluating the genotoxicity induced by fluoride. Few studies have revealed that FE induces genotoxicity. A total of 14 studies demonstrated negative results whereas 6 studies did not. After reviewing the twenty studies, 1 was classified as weak, 10 were considered moderate and 9 were considered strong, according to the EPHPP. Taken together, it has been established that genotoxicity of fluoride is limited.

Genotoxicity induced by endodontic sealers: A systematic review

Introduction

This systematic review aimed to help further elucidate the following question: are endodontics sealers able to induce DNA damage in vitro or in vivo?

Methods

This study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement 2020 criteria. A total of 23 studies were carefully selected by the authors.

Results

Regarding the general characteristics, most studies evaluated, on average, 3-5 types of sealers (resin epoxy, salicylate, salicylate + MTA, zinc oxide-eugenol, bioceramic products, calcium hydroxide), performing comparisons between them. Our results demonstrate that endodontic sealers may be a genotoxic agent since most studies demonstrated positive findings, with the resin-based ones being the most potentially genotoxic.

Conclusion

The type of genotoxicity assay, material evaluated, and dilution concentration levels influenced the outcome. This study clarifies whether and to what extent endodontic sealers are capable of inducing DNA injury in oral tissues.

Do hairdressers comprise a high risk group for genotoxicity? A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Nowadays, hair dye products are widely used for aesthetic purposes, in which it generates chemical exposure to customers and, mainly, hairdressers. The aim of this systematic review was designed to elucidate the following question: are hair dye products able to induce DNA damage in hairdressers?

METHODS

Studies were included in our analyses if they met the following criteria: (1) studies measuring genetic damage in vivo; (2) studies published in English; (3) studies that provided data clearly presented in scientific standards.

RESULTS

Full manuscripts from 13 studies were carefully selected in this setting. Our results demonstrate that hair dye products may contain chemical agents able to induce DNA strand breaks or chromosome damage since the majority of studies demonstrated positive findings for genotoxicity. A total of 7 studies (out of 13) had strong or moderate rates in the quality assessment. The type of genotoxicity assay and sample selection criteria time influenced the outcome.

CONCLUSION

In summary, our results reveal that hairdressers are occupationally exposed to genotoxic agents. Such findings are very important for protecting these professionals who are continuously exposed to chemicals for long periods.

Occupational exposure to pesticides: DNA damage in horticulturist from Nativitas, Tlaxcala in Mexico

Mexico is a country where agricultural activity is of great importance, but biomonitoring data are still scarce. With more intensive pesticides use per unit area/surface in horticultural productivity, there is a higher impact on environmental contamination and workers' health. Considering that exposure to various pesticide and pesticide mixtures represents an additional genotoxic risk, the appropriate characterization of exposure, confounding factors and the risk itself are very much needed. We compared genetic damage in 42 horticulturists and 46 unexposed controls (Nativitas, Tlaxcala) using alkaline comet (whole blood) and micronucleus (MN) test with nuclear abnormalities (NA) (buccal epithelial cells). Workers demonstrated significantly higher levels of damage (TI%=14.02 ± 2.49 vs. 5.37 ± 0.46; MN=10.14 ± 5.15 vs. 2.40 ± 0.20), with more than 90% of them not using protective clothing nor gloves during application. Combined DNA damage techniques and periodic monitoring together with educational programs for safe pesticide application is the best strategy to assess and prevent workers' health risks.