ABSTRACT
Genetic screening and monitoring, as well as different tools of molecular toxicology provide new frontiers for the evaluation of biologically relevant doses and for identifying risks in population groups and individuals exposed to occupational hazards. The prime importance of both lie in their relevance to disease prevention and prediction. But, will these tests really add something to the limited indicators for the occupational health physicians? The present review is trying to give possible answers with different examples obtained from both international and national research studies. Human genetic monitoring are considered to be highly relevant for classifying human cancer risks by many research agencies. In some cases, such data have led to changes in the classification of compounds based on the results of carcinogenicity tests in animals or epidemiological studies in humans. In general, there is frequent concordance between exposure to carcinogens and cytogenetic damage in human populations, supporting the predictivity of cytogenetic biomonitoring for cancer risk. Individuals who are said to be "more sensitive", "hypersensitive", or more susceptible" require relatively lower levels of exposure before they show a particular effect, such as chromosomal aberrations. Furthermore, the effect in one individual can vary over time and with other factors, resulting in intra- individual variation. However, the acceptability of genetic testing practices must further be assessed for compliance with preventive occupational medicine, not predicative medicine. If proven to be relevant, genetic susceptibility testing may become part of testing practices