Assessment of genotoxic potential of fragrance materials in the chicken egg assays

Abstract

AbstractThe genotoxic and clastogenic/aneugeneic potentials of four α,β‐unsaturated aldehydes, 2‐phenyl‐2‐butenal, nona‐2‐trans‐6‐cis‐dienal, 2‐methyl‐2‐pentenal, and p‐methoxy cinnamaldehyde, which are used as fragrance materials, were assessed using the Chicken Egg Genotoxicity Assay (CEGA) and the Hen's egg micronucleus (HET‐MN) assay, respectively. Selection of materials was based on their chemical structures and the results of their previous assessment in the regulatory in vitro and/or in vivo genotoxicity test battery. Three tested materials, 2‐phenyl‐2‐butenal, nona‐2‐trans‐6‐cis‐dienal, and 2‐methyl‐2‐pentenal, were negative in both, CEGA and HET‐MN assays. These findings were congruent with the results of regulatory in vivo genotoxicity assays. In contrast, p‐methoxy cinnamaldehyde, which was also negative in the in vivo genotoxicity assays, produced evidence of DNA damage, including DNA strand breaks and DNA adducts in CEGA. However, no increase in the micronucleus formation in blood was reported in the HET‐MN study. Such variation in responses between the CEGA and HET‐MN assay can be attributed to differences in the dosing protocols. Pretreatment with a glutathione precursor, N‐acetyl cysteine, negated positive outcomes produced by p‐methoxy cinnamaldehyde in CEGA, indicating that difference in response observed in the chicken egg and rodent models can be attributed to rapid glutathione depletion. Overall, our findings support the conclusion that CEGA and/or HET‐MN can be considered as a potential alternative to animal testing as follow‐up strategies for assessment of genotoxic potential of fragrance materials with evidence of genotoxicity in vitro.