The comet assay is a versatile and sensitive method for measuring single- and double-strand breaks in DNA. The mechanism of formation of comets (under neutral or alkaline conditions) is best understood by analogy with nucleoids, in which relaxation of DNA supercoiling in a structural loop of DNA by a single DNA break releases that loop to extend into a halo—or, in the case of the comet assay, to be pulled towards the anode under the electrophoretic field. A consideration of the simple physics underlying electrophoresis leads to a better understanding of the assay. The sensitivity of the assay is only fully appreciated when it is calibrated: between one hundred and several thousand breaks per cell can be determined. By including lesion-specific enzymes in the assay, its range and sensitivity are greatly increased, but it is important to bear in mind that their specificity is not absolute. Different approaches to quantitation of the comet assay are discussed. Arguments are presented against trying to apply the comet assay to the study of apoptosis. Finally, some of the advantages and disadvantages of using the comet assay on lymphocyte samples collected in human studies are rehearsed.

The comet assay is a widely used test for the detection of DNA damage and repair activity. However, there are interlaboratory differences in reported levels of baseline and induced damage in the same experimental systems. These differences may be attributed to protocol differences, although it is difficult to identify the relevant conditions because detailed comet assay procedures are not always published. Here, we present a Consensus Statement for the Minimum Information for Reporting Comet Assay (MIRCA) providing recommendations for describing comet assay conditions and results. These recommendations differentiate between ‘desirable’ and ‘essential’ information: ‘essential’ information refers to the precise details that are necessary to assess the quality of the experimental work, whereas ‘desirable’ information relates to technical issues that might be encountered when repeating the experiments. Adherence to MIRCA recommendations should ensure that comet assay results can be easily interpreted and independently verified by other researchers.

Lifestyle factors are responsible for a considerable portion of cancer incidence worldwide, but credible estimates from the World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) suggest that the fraction of cancers attributable to toxic environmental exposures is between 7% and 19%. To explore the hypothesis that low-dose exposures to mixtures of chemicals in the environment may be combining to contribute to environmental carcinogenesis, we reviewed 11 hallmark phenotypes of cancer, multiple priority target sites for disruption in each area and prototypical chemical disruptors for all targets, this included dose-response characterizations, evidence of low-dose effects and cross-hallmark effects for all targets and chemicals. In total, 85 examples of chemicals were reviewed for actions on key pathways/mechanisms related to carcinogenesis. Only 15% (13/85) were found to have evidence of a dose-response threshold, whereas 59% (50/85) exerted low-dose effects. No dose-response information was found for the remaining 26% (22/85). Our analysis suggests that the cumulative effects of individual (non-carcinogenic) chemicals acting on different pathways, and a variety of related systems, organs, tissues and cells could plausibly conspire to produce carcinogenic synergies. Additional basic research on carcinogenesis and research focused on low-dose effects of chemical mixtures needs to be rigorously pursued before the merits of this hypothesis can be further advanced. However, the structure of the World Health Organization International Programme on Chemical Safety ‘Mode of Action’ framework should be revisited as it has inherent weaknesses that are not fully aligned with our current understanding of cancer biology.