ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2026
Comparative investigation of the potential of glyphosate and glyphosate-based formulations to cause oxidative stress and DNA damage in human skin and liver cell systems.
Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Glyphosate is an herbicide found worldwide in glyphosate-based formulations (GBFs). Although glyphosate appears to have a low toxicity profile for humans and mammals, conflicting reports exist regarding the risk for cancer in humans. US-EPA and European regulatory agencies have described glyphosate as unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans. However, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A)," citing "mechanistic data provide strong evidence for genotoxicity and oxidative stress." Given these discrepancies, the Division of Translational Toxicology at NIEHS designed an experimental strategy to expand mechanistic evidence and address critical gaps within existing literature (e.g. mechanistic evaluations of glyphosate alongside GBFs, inclusion of context-defining positive controls). Cell morphology, viability, H2O2, and γH2AX formation were assayed in human keratinocytes (HaCaT), previously cited by IARC, and human hepatocytes (HepaRG) to derive benchmark concentrations and fold-change response metrics. Our findings revealed glyphosate alone was weakly and inconsistently bioactive for oxidative stress and DNA damage when compared with positive controls. In contrast, most of the 13 GBFs evaluated were more clearly bioactive with no apparent correlation to varied glyphosate concentrations. Hierarchical clustering of biological responses revealed some bioactive GBFs to cluster near well-characterized positive controls for oxidative stress, whereas 4 GBFs clustered more similarly to negative controls and glyphosate. Collectively, this study provides a robust dataset with context-defining results that advance our understanding of the hazard potential of GBFs while revealing that glyphosate is likely not a primary driver of oxidative stress from GBF exposures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.