Abstract
When a comet assay, an increasingly popular in vivo genotoxicity test, shows a positive test result, interpretation of that response requires ruling out any confounding tissue site toxicity. Since the comet assay typically uses only two or three daily doses of test agent, precursor tissue changes indicative of toxicity may be easily overlooked. Using case examples for two flavoring agents, perillaldehyde and 4,5-epoxydec-2(trans)-enal, we highlight the role of pathology peer review in verifying precursor tissue changes indicative of tissue site toxicity, thereby increasing confidence in final interpretation of comet assay results. Given global deliberation regarding safety assessment of compounds entering the marketplace, we recommend consideration of pathology peer review for equivocal and positive comet assays so that interpretations are universally consistent.