Unveiling Urinary Mutagenicity by the Ames Test for Occupational Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review

Bela Barros, Marta Oliveira and Simone Morais ()
Additional contact information
Bela Barros: REQUIMTE-LAQV, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal
Marta Oliveira: REQUIMTE-LAQV, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal
Simone Morais: REQUIMTE-LAQV, Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto, Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 20, 1-20

Abstract: Occupational exposure may involve a variety of toxic compounds. A mutagenicity analysis using the Ames test can provide valuable information regarding the toxicity of absorbed xenobiotics. Through a search of relevant databases, this systematic review gathers and critically discusses the published papers (excluding other types of publications) from 2001–2021 that have assessed urinary mutagenicity (Ames test with Salmonella typhimurium ) in an occupational exposure context. Due to the heterogeneity of the study methods, a meta-analysis could not be conducted. The characterized occupations were firefighters, traffic policemen, bus drivers, mail carriers, coke oven and charcoal workers, chemical laboratory staff, farmers, pharmacy workers, and professionals from several other industrial sectors. The genetically modified bacterial strains (histidine dependent) TA98, TA100, YG1041, YG1021, YG1024 and YG1042 have been used for the health risk assessment of individual (e.g., polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) and mixtures of compounds (e.g., diesel engine exhaust, fire smoke, industrial fumes/dyes) in different contexts. Although comparison of the data between studies is challenging, urinary mutagenicity can be very informative of possible associations between work-related exposure and the respective mutagenic potential. Careful interpretation of results and their direct use for occupational health risk assessment are crucial and yet complex; the use of several strains is highly recommended since individual and/or synergistic effects of complex exposure to xenobiotics can be overlooked. Future studies should improve the methods used to reach a standardized protocol for specific occupational environments to strengthen the applicability of the urinary mutagenicity assay and reduce inter- and intra-individual variability and exposure source confounders.

Keywords: urinary biomarker; toxic exposure; occupational health; mutagenicity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13074/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13074/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:20:p:13074-:d:939372

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().