Methanol exposure does not lead to accumulation of oxidative DNA damage in bone marrow and spleen of mice, rabbits or primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genotoxicity tests indicate methanol (MeOH) is not mutagenic, but a rodent study has suggested carcinogenic potential, which could result from free radical-initiated oxidative DNA damage. To investigate this possibility we treated male CD-1 mice, New Zealand white rabbits, and cynomolgus monkeys with MeOH (2.0 g/kg ip) and assessed tissue oxidative DNA damage 6 h post-dose, measured as 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-oxodG). We found no MeOH-dependent increases in 8-oxodG in bone marrow or spleen of any species. Chronic treatment of CD-1 mice with MeOH (2.0 g/kg ip) daily for 15 d also did not increase 8-oxodG levels in these organs. Further studies in the DNA repair deficient oxoguanine glycosylase 1 (Ogg1) knockout (KO) mice supported these findings. Fibroblasts from Ogg1 KO mice accumulated 8-oxodG following acute exposure to the renal carcinogen potassium bromate (KBrO(3) ; 2.0 mM) but did not accumulate 8-oxodG following exposure to 125 mM MeOH 6 h post-treatment. Ogg1 KO mice accumulated 8-oxodG in bone marrow and spleen with age but not following exposure to MeOH. In addition, free radical-mediated hydroxynonenal-histidine protein adducts were not enhanced by MeOH in primate bone marrow or spleen, or in rabbit bone marrow or mouse spleen, although modest increases were observed in rabbit spleen and mouse bone marrow. Taken together these observations suggest that MeOH exposure does not promote the accumulation of oxidative DNA damage in bone marrow and spleen, and it is unlikely that human environmental exposure to MeOH would lead to lymphomas via this mechanism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".