Literature DB >> 6374383

Genetic mode of action of cocarcinogens and tumor promoters in yeast and mice.

R Fahrig.   

Abstract

In experiments with yeast, cocarcinogens were found to be comutagenic and antirecombinogenic , tumor promoters to be corecombinogenic and antimutagenic. Substances that were cocarcinogens as well as tumor promoters had an intermediary effect. These results were confirmed in the mammalian spot test: By in vivo treatment of mice with the cocarcinogen catechol and the tumor promoter limonene carcinogen-induced recombination due to mitotic crossing over and gene mutations was reduced and enhanced, respectively. Our results support the hypothesis that mutagenesis is the mechanism by which chemicals induce malignancy, and that cocarcinogens modify the process by enhancement of mutagenicity whereas tumor promoters effect carcinogenesis by increase of the spontaneous frequency of recombination. In addition, induced mitotic recombination in mammals in vivo has been demonstrated for the first time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6374383     DOI: 10.1007/bf00383490

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Gen Genet        ISSN: 0026-8925


  24 in total

1.  Tumor promotion by citrus oils: tumors of the skin and urethral orifice in mice.

Authors:  F J ROE; W E PEIRCE
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1960-06       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Radiation-Induced Presumed Somatic Mutations in the House Mouse.

Authors:  L B Russell; M H Major
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1957-03       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  A mammalian spot test: induction of genetic alterations in pigment cells of mouse embryos with x-rays and chemical mutagens.

Authors:  R Fahrig
Journal:  Mol Gen Genet       Date:  1975-07-10

4.  The tumor-promoting agents of tobacco leaf and tobacco smoke condensate.

Authors:  B L Van Duuren; A Sivak; A Segal; L Orris; L Langseth
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1966-10       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  The effect of dose and time on the induction of genetic alterations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by aminoacridines in the presence and absence of visible light irradiation in comparison with the dose-effect-curves of mutagens with other type of action.

Authors:  R Fahrig
Journal:  Mol Gen Genet       Date:  1976-03-22

6.  Effect of phorbol myristate acetate on the recovery of spontaneous and ultraviolet light-induced 6-thioguanine and ouabain-resistant Chinese hamster cells.

Authors:  J E Trosko; C C Chang; L P Yotti; E H Chu
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1977-01       Impact factor: 12.701

7.  Cocarcinogenic effects of n-alkanes and ultraviolet light on mice.

Authors:  E Bingham; P J Nord
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1977-04       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Mechanisms of metal carcinogenesis.

Authors:  F W Sunderman
Journal:  Biol Trace Elem Res       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 3.738

9.  Tumorigenicity of acridine orange.

Authors:  B L Van Duuren; A Sivak; C Katz; S Melchionne
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1969-09       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  CONDITIONAL NEOPLASMS AND SUBTHRESHOLD NEOPLASTIC STATES : A STUDY OF THE TAR TUMORS OF RABBITS.

Authors:  P Rous; J G Kidd
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  1941-02-28       Impact factor: 14.307

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Dietary carcinogens, environmental pollution, and cancer: some misconceptions.

Authors:  B N Ames; L S Gold
Journal:  Med Oncol Tumor Pharmacother       Date:  1990

Review 2.  Arsenic: opportunity for risk assessment.

Authors:  G Stöhrer
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 5.153

3.  Effects of bile acids on the mutagenicity and recombinogenicity of triethylene melamine in yeast strains MP1 and D61.M.

Authors:  R Fahrig
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 5.153

4.  Enhancement of carcinogen-induced mutations or recombinations by 12-O-tetradecanoyl-phorbol-13-acetate in the mammalian spot test.

Authors:  R Fahrig
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 4.553

5.  The mouse spot test: results with a new cross.

Authors:  J Hart
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 5.153

6.  Genetic effects of dioxins in the spot test with mice.

Authors:  R Fahrig
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 9.031

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.