{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016788321167883213, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01167883211678832, 'mean_word_length': 5.406542056074766, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Use of genetic toxicity data in GHS mutagenicity classification and labeling of substances

One of the key outcomes of testing the potential genotoxicity or mutagenicity of a substance is the conclusion on whether the substance should be classified as a germ cell mutagen and the significance of this for other endpoints such as carcinogenicity. The basis for this conclusion are the criteria presented in classification and labelling systems such as the Globally Harmonized System for classification and labeling (GHS). This article reviews the classification criteria for germ cell mutagenicity and carcinogenicity and how they are applied to substances with evidence of mutagenicity. The implications and suitability of such a classification for hazard communication, risk assessment, and risk management are discussed. It is proposed that genotoxicity assessments should not focus on specifically identifying germ cell mutagens, particularly given the challenges associated with communicating this information in a meaningful way. Rather the focus should be on deriving data to characterize the mode of action and for use in the risk assessment of mutagens, which could then feed into a more robust, risk based management of mutagenic substances versus the current more hazard based approaches. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 58:354–360, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.