Answer Explanations 4
Change my comment for this question to: I agree with user 553126 [Expert 5] that while 1,3-D may pose a hazard, the risk is negligible at realistic conditions.
Most likely aneugenicExpert 5
There are several suggestive positive results in the last 2 tables of the white paper, although they all have some questions. These have been detailed in the other reviewers’ responses. I do not think that the use of DMSO as a solvent necessarily disqualifies a test, as DMSO reacts with 1,3-D epoxide and not 1,3-D, and in some cases it is not known if the epoxide was present in the 1,3-D. The studies cited above cannot rule out an aneugenic response and the question asks about the aneugenic potential of 1,3-D. The results cited indicate that 1,3-D is certainly not strongly aneugenic, but some aneugenic potential has not been ruled out.
Most likely NOT aneugenicExpert 14
This, however, is only a guess since no reliable in vitro data are available and the relevant in vivo data (bone marrow micronucleus test) bear limitations. An in vitro micronucleus test, OECD TG 487 compliant, would not only provide relevant and robust information on the clastogenicity of the compound but also information on the aneugenic potential (FISH extended) in case of positive results for induction of micronuclei. The additional use of GSH would possibly provide further useful information.
Clearly NOT aneugenicExpert 1
no evidence of aneugenicty