2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.10.022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genotoxic activities of the food contaminant 5-hydroxymethylfurfural using different in vitro bioassays

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
74
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(78 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
74
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the study, none of the results of the Ames test (+S9 or −S9) exceeded the critical value of 2.0 and all quotients ranged below 1.6, except at the lowest concentrations (0.5, 5 and 50 mg) in TA 1535 with S9 (2, 1.7, 1.6, respectively for the quotients), without concentration effect profile. Therefore, the Ames test did not show any genotoxic potential of HMF compared to the respective positive controls [Severin et al, 2010]. In studies conducted by the NTP, 5-hydroxymethyl--2-furfural was weakly mutagenic to S. typhimurium strain TA100 in the absence of exogenous metabolic activation (S9) over a concentration range of 100 to 10,000 µg/plate.…”
Section: Carcinogenic Toxic and Mutagenic Activities Of Hmfmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the study, none of the results of the Ames test (+S9 or −S9) exceeded the critical value of 2.0 and all quotients ranged below 1.6, except at the lowest concentrations (0.5, 5 and 50 mg) in TA 1535 with S9 (2, 1.7, 1.6, respectively for the quotients), without concentration effect profile. Therefore, the Ames test did not show any genotoxic potential of HMF compared to the respective positive controls [Severin et al, 2010]. In studies conducted by the NTP, 5-hydroxymethyl--2-furfural was weakly mutagenic to S. typhimurium strain TA100 in the absence of exogenous metabolic activation (S9) over a concentration range of 100 to 10,000 µg/plate.…”
Section: Carcinogenic Toxic and Mutagenic Activities Of Hmfmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Severin et al [2010] demonstrated that HMF was not cytotoxic to bacteria at the highest concentration (5000 µg/ plate), with or without exogenous activation system (S9). In the study, none of the results of the Ames test (+S9 or −S9) exceeded the critical value of 2.0 and all quotients ranged below 1.6, except at the lowest concentrations (0.5, 5 and 50 mg) in TA 1535 with S9 (2, 1.7, 1.6, respectively for the quotients), without concentration effect profile.…”
Section: Carcinogenic Toxic and Mutagenic Activities Of Hmfmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…By the Salmonella microsome assay, examination of possible mutagenic effects of HMF on the Salmonella typhimurium indicator strains TA98 and TA102 revealed the lack of obvious mutagenicity of HMF (Cheriot et al, 2009). Severin et al used five strains including four Salmonella typhimurium strains and Escherichia coli WP2uvrapKM101 to test the genotoxicity of HMF and found no genotoxic potential of HMF at the highest concentration (5000μg/plate) (Severin et al, 2010). They also tested the genotoxicity of HMF by hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2) cells and found that HMF induced DNA damage at concentrations from 7.87 to 25 mM in comet assay (Severin et al, 2010).…”
Section: Genotoxicitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Severin et al used five strains including four Salmonella typhimurium strains and Escherichia coli WP2uvrapKM101 to test the genotoxicity of HMF and found no genotoxic potential of HMF at the highest concentration (5000μg/plate) (Severin et al, 2010). They also tested the genotoxicity of HMF by hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2) cells and found that HMF induced DNA damage at concentrations from 7.87 to 25 mM in comet assay (Severin et al, 2010). The discrepancy between these results may be attributed to the involvement of SULT1A1 in HepG2 cells.…”
Section: Genotoxicitymentioning
confidence: 99%