Literature DB >> 2407532

Comparative studies on the genotoxic activity of mainstream smoke condensate from cigarettes which burn or only heat tobacco.

D J Doolittle1, C K Lee, J L Ivett, J C Mirsalis, E Riccio, C J Rudd, G T Burger, A W Hayes.   

Abstract

The in vitro genotoxic activity of mainstream cigarette smoke condensate (CSC) from cigarettes which heat but do not burn tobacco was compared to that of CSC from cigarettes which burn tobacco. CSCs from five cigarettes were compared. Three of the cigarettes [the Kentucky reference research cigarette (1R4F), a commercially available ultra-low tar brand (ULT) and a commercially available ultra-low tar menthol brand (ULT-menthol]) burn tobacco while two of the cigarettes [a regular (TEST) and a menthol (TEST-menthol]) heat tobacco. CSC from all cigarettes were collected by identical standard techniques, which involved collecting mainstream smoke particulate matter on Cambridge filter pads under FTC smoking conditions. The pads were extracted with DMSO, and the CSCs obtained [10 mg total particulate matter (TPM)/ml DMSO] were evaluated at identical concentrations in an in vitro genetic toxicology test battery. CSCs from 1R4F, ULT, and ULT-menthol cigarettes were mutagenic in Ames bacterial strains TA98, TA100, TA1537, and TA1538 in the presence of metabolic activation (S9 from Aroclor-induced rat liver) but negative in strain TA1535. In the absence of metabolic activation, 1R4F, ULT, and ULT-menthol CSCs were not mutagenic except for a weak response in strain TA1537 for the 1R4F and ULT CSCs. TEST and TEST-menthol CSCs were nonmutagenic in all five bacterial strains, both with and without metabolic activation. CSCs from 1R4F, ULT, and ULT-menthol cigarettes were positive in the CHO-chromosomal aberration assay and in the CHO--sister chromatid exchange assay both with and without metabolic activation while TEST and TEST-menthol CSCs were negative in both assays, either with or without metabolic activation. CSCs from 1R4F, ULT, and ULT-menthol cigarettes were weakly positive in inducing DNA repair in cultured rat hepatocytes while TEST and TEST-menthol CSCs were negative in this assay. All five CSCs were nonmutagenic in the CHO-HGPRT assay both with and without metabolic activation. CSCs from the 1R4F, ULT, and ULT-menthol cigarettes were cytotoxic in the CHO-HGPRT assay, both with and without metabolic activation, while TEST and TEST-menthol CSCs were not cytotoxic under either condition. These results demonstrate that mainstream CSCs from the TEST and TEST-menthol cigarettes are neither genotoxic nor cytotoxic under conditions where CSCs from 1R4F, ULT, and ULT-menthol cigarettes are genotoxic and/or cytotoxic in a concentration-dependent manner.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2407532     DOI: 10.1002/em.2850150206

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen        ISSN: 0893-6692            Impact factor:   3.216


  8 in total

Review 1.  Evaluation of in vitro assays for assessing the toxicity of cigarette smoke and smokeless tobacco.

Authors:  Michael D Johnson; Jodi Schilz; Mirjana V Djordjevic; Jerry R Rice; Peter G Shields
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Cytotoxicity and mutagenicity of sidestream cigarette smoke particulate matter of different particle sizes.

Authors:  Xiang Li; Bencheng Lin; Huashan Zhang; Fuwei Xie; Na Ta; Lei Tian; Huimin Liu; Zhuge Xi
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Activated charcoal filter effectively reduces p-benzosemiquinone from the mainstream cigarette smoke and prevents emphysema.

Authors:  Neekkan Dey; Archita Das; Arunava Ghosh; Indu B Chatterjee
Journal:  J Biosci       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.826

Review 4.  Will chronic e-cigarette use cause lung disease?

Authors:  Temperance R Rowell; Robert Tarran
Journal:  Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 5.464

5.  The health effects of menthol cigarettes as compared to non-menthol cigarettes.

Authors:  Allison C Hoffman
Journal:  Tob Induc Dis       Date:  2011-05-23       Impact factor: 2.600

6.  Genetic toxicology and toxicogenomic analysis of three cigarette smoke condensates in vitro reveals few differences among full-flavor, blonde, and light products.

Authors:  Carole L Yauk; Andrew Williams; Julie K Buick; Guosheng Chen; Rebecca M Maertens; Sabina Halappanavar; Paul A White
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2012-03-19       Impact factor: 3.216

7.  Development, qualification, validation and application of the Ames test using a VITROCELL® VC10® smoke exposure system.

Authors:  Kathy Fowler; Wanda Fields; Victoria Hargreaves; Lesley Reeve; Betsy Bombick
Journal:  Toxicol Rep       Date:  2018-04-12

8.  A comparative assessment of cigarette smoke aerosols using an in vitro air-liquid interface cytotoxicity test.

Authors:  David Thorne; Annette Dalrymple; Deborah Dillon; Martin Duke; Clive Meredith
Journal:  Inhal Toxicol       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 2.724

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.