Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of cyphenothrin active ingredient compared with its microencapsulated commercial formulation in human cell lines: an in vitro study
4 affiliations
- 1Institute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
- 2Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Benha University, Al-Qlayobia, Egypt
- 3Department of Physiology, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
- 4Department of Genetics and Genomics, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
Abstract
BackgroundCyphenothrin is a widely used type II pyrethroid insecticide. Its regulatory risk assessment, like that of most pesticides, is based primarily on the active ingredient, leaving the genotoxic potential of encapsulated commercial formulations such as Bombex Farumy largely uncharacterized.MethodsWe compared cytotoxic (propidium iodide exclusion) and genotoxic (alkaline comet assay) effects of cyphenothrin active ingredient versus its microencapsulated and released formulations in human HL60 and HepG2 cells following 1 h exposures.ResultsRelative to the active ingredient, DNA damage indicators were numerically lower for encapsulated Bombex Farumy by 29%–83% (median 61%) at concentrations where the active ingredient differed significantly from control. Encapsulated Bombex Farumy showed minimal effects overall, although significant, nonmonotonic increases in tail length and tail moment occurred at select concentrations in HL60, and modest elevations were observed in HepG2 only at 1,000 µM. Released Bombex Farumy showed numerically intermediate effects, but direct pairwise contrasts between released and encapsulated Bombex Farumy were not statistically significant at any concentration or endpoint after correction for multiple comparisons.ConclusionIn this exploratory, hypothesis generating study, DNA damage indicators were numerically lower for encapsulated than for released formulation or active ingredient cyphenothrin, but direct statistical contrasts between formulations did not reach significance, so a mitigating effect of microencapsulation remains uncertain. Nevertheless, even these preliminary findings suggest that regulatory frameworks relying only on active ingredients may not fully capture formulation specific risks, supporting the need for confirmatory, adequately powered, regulatory compliant testing.
Related
- Saccharin-Enabled Oral Formulation, Biopharmaceutics and Early Genotoxicity Assessment of the PPARγ Antagonist T0070907
- Research Progress on Genotoxicity and Molecular Mechanisms of Environmental Endocrine Disruptors
- Plant‐Derived Senolytic Ingredient, Camellia sinensis Root Extract, Ameliorates Skin Aging‐Associated Phenotypes
- Advancing genotoxicity assessment with transcriptomic biomarkers: from 2D to 3D HepaRG spheroid models
- Ecotoxicological impacts of benzo[a]pyrene on Ctenopharyngodon idella larvae: hemato-immunological disruption, genotoxicity, and histopathological alterations
BibTeX
@article{sherif2026cytotoxicity,
title = {{Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of cyphenothrin active ingredient compared with its microencapsulated commercial formulation in human cell lines: an in vitro study}},
author = {Moustafa Sherif and Moustafa Sherif and Abderrahim Nemmar and Bassam R. Ali and Balázs Ádám},
journal = {Frontiers in Toxicology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/ftox.2026.1932062},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2026.1932062},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of cyphenothrin active ingredient compared with its microencapsulated commercial formulation in human cell lines: an in vitro study
AU - Moustafa Sherif
AU - Moustafa Sherif
AU - Abderrahim Nemmar
AU - Bassam R. Ali
AU - Balázs Ádám
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/23
JO - Frontiers in Toxicology
DO - 10.3389/ftox.2026.1932062
UR - https://doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2026.1932062
AB - BackgroundCyphenothrin is a widely used type II pyrethroid insecticide. Its regulatory risk assessment, like that of most pesticides, is based primarily on the active ingredient, leaving the genotoxic potential of encapsulated commercial formulations such as Bombex Farumy largely uncharacterized.MethodsWe compared cytotoxic (propidium iodide exclusion) and genotoxic (alkaline comet assay) effects of cyphenothrin active ingredient versus its microencapsulated and released formulations in human HL60 and HepG2 cells following 1 h exposures.ResultsRelative to the active ingredient, DNA damage indicators were numerically lower for encapsulated Bombex Farumy by 29%–83% (median 61%) at concentrations where the active ingredient differed significantly from control. Encapsulated Bombex Farumy showed minimal effects overall, although significant, nonmonotonic increases in tail length and tail moment occurred at select concentrations in HL60, and modest elevations were observed in HepG2 only at 1,000 µM. Released Bombex Farumy showed numerically intermediate effects, but direct pairwise contrasts between released and encapsulated Bombex Farumy were not statistically significant at any concentration or endpoint after correction for multiple comparisons.ConclusionIn this exploratory, hypothesis generating study, DNA damage indicators were numerically lower for encapsulated than for released formulation or active ingredient cyphenothrin, but direct statistical contrasts between formulations did not reach significance, so a mitigating effect of microencapsulation remains uncertain. Nevertheless, even these preliminary findings suggest that regulatory frameworks relying only on active ingredients may not fully capture formulation specific risks, supporting the need for confirmatory, adequately powered, regulatory compliant testing.
SN - 2673-3080
ER -