Carcinogenicity studies tumor promotion

A scientifically evaluated and fully referenced data bank, developed and maintained by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). It contains some 8,000 chemical records with carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, tumor promotion, and tumor inhibition test results. Data are derived from studies cited in primaiy journals, current awareness tools, NCI reports, and other special sources. Test results have been reviewed by experts in carcinogenesis and mutagenesis. 

Many of the xenobiotics that activate PXR and CAR are carcinogenic or tumor promoters. Classically, PB has been recognized to promote tumors in rodent, but not human livers. Recent studies now have shown that at least part of the tumorigenesis... 

Roe, F.J. C., Levy, L.S. and Carter, R.L., 1970, Feeding studies on sodium cyclamate, saccharin and sucrose for carcinogenic and tumor-promoting activity. Food Cosmet. Toxicol., 8 135-145. 

Human data as well as studies in animals have provided negative evidence of carcinogenicity for endosulfan (Hack et al. 1995 Hoechst 1988b, 1989a). However, endosulfan promoted the development of altered hepatic foci in rats initiated with nitrosodiethylamine (Fransson-Steen et al. 1992). Although the mechanism of tumor promotion of endosulfan is not known, it has been suggested that it involves inhibition of cellular communication (Kenne et al. 1994). A brief discussion of this topic is provided in Section 2.5 under Cancer Effects. 

Klaunig et al. (1991) found that hepatocyte DNA synthesis increased significantly in male mice exposed to trichloroethylene by gavage for up to 14 days, but no such increase was seen in female mice or in renal DNA synthesis in either sex. Similar exposures in rats produced increases in renal DNA synthesis in males, but no such increase in females, or in hepatic DNA synthesis in either sex. These results correlate well with observed species- and gender-specific trichloroethylene carcinogenicity, and the study authors suggest that trichloroethylene acts as a tumor promoter to induce proliferation of previously initiated cells. 

In several studies of toxicity, no adverse effects were documented in monkeys or humans. Taking into account data showing that lutein was not genotoxic, had no structural alert, did not exhibit tumor-promoting activity, and is a natural component of the body (the eye), the Scientific Steering Committee concluded there was no need for a study of carcinogenicity. 

In addition to their possible prooxidant activity (see above) polyphenols and flavonoids may influence cancer cells via their antioxidant properties. Recently, Jang et al. [219] studied cancer chemopreventive activity of resveratrol, a natural polyphenolic compound derived from grapes (Chapter 29). These authors showed that resveratrol inhibited the development of preneoplastic lesions in carcinogen-treated mouse mammary glands in culture and inhibited tumorigenesis in a mouse skin cancer model. Flavonoids silymarin and silibinin also exhibited antitumor-promoting effects at the stage I tumor promotion in mouse skin [220] and manifested antiproliferative effects in rat prostate cancer cells [221]. 

Cancer. No studies have been conducted in human populations to determine whether mirex or chlordecone causes cancer. However, studies in mice and rats have demonstrated the ability of mirex to cause liver tumors (Innes et al. 1969 NTP 1990 Ulland et al. 1977a), pheochromocytomas (NTP 1990), and rare renal tumors (NTP 1990). A study in mice and rats also showed the ability of chlordecone to increase liver tumors (NC11976). As indicated above, available data on the genotoxicity of mirex and chlordecone indicate that these chemicals do not cause cancer by a mutagenic mechanism but rather by tumor promotion. Both mirex and chlordecone are considered by the DHHS to be substances that may reasonably be anticipated to be carcinogens and by IARC to be possible human carcinogens. EPA has not classified mirex or chlordecone as to their carcinogenicity. 

Phenol has been tested in animals for carcinogenicity by the oral and dermal routes, but results are equivocal. In a chronic NCI cancer bioassay (NCI 1980), a significant incidence of tumors (pheochro-mocytomas of the adrenal gland, leukemia, or lymphomas) occurred only in male rats exposed to the lowest dose level (2,500 ppm, 277 mg/kg/day) of phenol but not in male or female mice or male rats exposed to a higher dose level (5,000 ppm, 624 mg/kg/day). Since tumors occurred only in males in one of the two species tested, and since a positive dose-response relationship was not established, this study does not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that phenol is carcinogenic when administered by the oral route. Dermal application of phenol has been shown to result in tumors in mice phenol is a tumor promoter when it is applied after the application of the tumor initiator DMBA (Boutwell and Bosch 1959 Salaman and Glendenning 1957 Wynder and Hoffmann 1961). However, this effect occurs at dose levels of phenol that produce severe skin... 

Carcinogenicity studies are a time-consuming (up to 3 years to complete) and expensive (can be in excess of 1 million dollars each) proposition and are typically carried out in rats and mice. Their purpose is to determine if the drug possesses the capability to initiate or promote the development of tumors. The application of the results of these studies to the human safety has been debated for many years. In many instances over the past two decades, mechanistic studies have shown that positive responses in these rodent models do not have specific relevance for humans, and drugs have been approved on the basis of these explanations. While the scientific debate about relevance of these studies continues, they remain required by regulations. Positive responses without adequate explanation or safety margin can result in nonapproval of the product. 

Lead will also cause cancers in the kidney and lung in experimental animals. Furthermore, in humans exposed to lead similar tumors have been detected in epidemiological studies. Although the mechanism is not known, it is known that lead interferes with calcium-dependent protein kinases. The activation of PKC-mediated pathways leads to increased DNA synthesis. Thus, lead can cause increased cell replication and, so, hyperplasia. This may underlie the carcinogenicity. Lead may also act as a tumor promoter. 

---