<scp>AOP</scp> report: Development of an adverse outcome pathway for oxidative <scp>DNA</scp> damage leading to mutations and chromosomal aberrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Genetic Toxicology Technical Committee (GTTC) of the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) is developing adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) that describe modes of action leading to potentially heritable genomic damage. The goal was to enhance the use of mechanistic information in genotoxicity assessment by building empirical support for the relationships between relevant molecular initiating events (MIEs) and regulatory endpoints in genetic toxicology. Herein, we present an AOP network that links oxidative DNA damage to two adverse outcomes (AOs): mutations and chromosomal aberrations. We collected empirical evidence from the literature to evaluate the key event relationships between the MIE and the AOs, and assessed the weight of evidence using the modified Bradford-Hill criteria for causality. Oxidative DNA damage is constantly induced and repaired in cells given the ubiquitous presence of reactive oxygen species and free radicals. However, xenobiotic exposures may increase damage above baseline levels through a variety of mechanisms and overwhelm DNA repair and endogenous antioxidant capacity. Unrepaired oxidative DNA base damage can lead to base substitutions during replication and, along with repair intermediates, can also cause DNA strand breaks that can lead to mutations and chromosomal aberrations if not repaired adequately. This AOP network identifies knowledge gaps that could be filled by targeted studies designed to better define the quantitative relationships between key events, which could be leveraged for quantitative chemical safety assessment. We anticipate that this AOP network will provide the building blocks for additional genotoxicity-associated AOPs and aid in designing novel integrated testing approaches for genotoxicity.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.018 |
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".