Literature DB >> 7678909

Comparison of target organs of carcinogenicity for mutagenic and non-mutagenic chemicals.

L S Gold1, T H Slone, B R Stern, L Bernstein.   

Abstract

A comparison of target organs for mutagens and non-mutagens is presented for 351 rodent carcinogens in the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB) with mutagenicity evaluations in Salmonella. Results are consistent with the hypotheses that in high-dose rodent tests mitogenesis is important in the carcinogenic response for mutagens and non-mutagens alike, and that mutagens have a multiplicative interaction for carcinogenicity because they can both damage DNA directly and cause cell division at high doses. These hypotheses would lead one to expect several results that are found in the analysis: First, a high proportion of both mutagens and non-mutagens induce tumors in rodent bioassays at the MTD. Second, mutagens compared to non-mutagens are: (a) more likely to be carcinogenic; (b) more likely to induce tumors at multiple target sites; and (c) more likely to be carcinogenic in two species. Among carcinogens that induce tumors at multiple sites in both rats and mice, 81% are mutagens; in comparison, among carcinogens that are positive at only a single target site in one species and are negative in the other, 42% are mutagens. Since tissue distribution and pharmacokinetics would not be expected to differ systematically between mutagens and non-mutagens, one would not expect systematic differences in the particular organs in which tumors are induced. Results do not support the idea that mutagens and non-mutagens induce tumors in different target organs. Both mutagens and non-mutagens induce tumors in a wide variety of sites, and most organs are target sites for both. Moreover, the same sites tend to be the most common sites for both: 79% or more of both mutagenic and non-mutagenic carcinogens are positive in each species in at least one of the 8 most frequent target sites: liver, lung, mammary gland, stomach, vascular system, kidney, hematopoietic system and urinary bladder. Species differences are discussed as well as results for particular target organs: liver, Zymbal's gland and kidney.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 7678909     DOI: 10.1016/0027-5107(93)90004-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutat Res        ISSN: 0027-5107            Impact factor:   2.433


  10 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.  Benzothiazole degradation by Rhodococcus pyridinovorans strain PA: evidence of a catechol 1,2-dioxygenase activity.

Authors:  Nicolas Haroune; Bruno Combourieu; Pascale Besse; Martine Sancelme; Thorsten Reemtsma; Achim Kloepfer; Amer Diab; Jeremy S Knapp; Simon Baumberg; Anne-Marie Delort
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Long-range (1)H-(15)N heteronuclear shift correlation at natural abundance: a tool to study benzothiazole biodegradation by two rhodococcus strains.

Authors:  P Besse; B Combourieu; G Boyse; M Sancelme; H De Wever; A M Delort
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Metabolism of 2-mercaptobenzothiazole by Rhodococcus rhodochrous.

Authors:  Nicolas Haroune; Bruno Combourieu; Pascale Besse; Martine Sancelme; Achim Kloepfer; Thorsten Reemtsma; Heleen De Wever; Anne-Marie Delort
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Comparison of microbial and photochemical processes and their combination for degradation of 2-aminobenzothiazole.

Authors:  Andrei Bunescu; Pascale Besse-Hoggan; Martine Sancelme; Gilles Mailhot; Anne-Marie Delort
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2008-02-29       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 6.  Topics in cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  S S Olin; D A Neumann; J A Foran; G J Scarano
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 7.  Sixth plot of the carcinogenic potency database: results of animal bioassays published in the General Literature 1989 to 1990 and by the National Toxicology Program 1990 to 1993.

Authors:  L S Gold; N B Manley; T H Slone; G B Garfinkel; B N Ames; L Rohrbach; B R Stern; K Chow
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 8.  DNA lesions, inducible DNA repair, and cell division: three key factors in mutagenesis and carcinogenesis.

Authors:  B N Ames; M K Shigenaga; L S Gold
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  The Detoxification and Degradation of Benzothiazole from the Wastewater in Microbial Electrolysis Cells.

Authors:  Xianshu Liu; Jie Ding; Nanqi Ren; Qingyue Tong; Luyan Zhang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Removal of the 2-mercaptobenotiazole from model wastewater by ozonation.

Authors:  Jan Derco; Angelika Kassai; Michal Melicher; Jozef Dudas
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-01-23
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.