Chemical Carcinogenesis: From Animal Models To Molecular Models In One Decade

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-230X(08)60434-0Get rights and content

Publisher Summary

Chemical carcinogenesis research has substantially broadened the understanding of the cellular and molecular changes involved in cancer development and provided new information on cell biology. The association of chemicals as causative factors in human cancers, the development of in vivo and in vitro experimental models, and technical advances facilitating a molecular approach to problems in cell biology have provided the impetus for progress in this research area. This chapter presents the newer experimental models and techniques that have built on the early observations to enhance the understanding of the process of cancer development at the molecular level. The chapter focuses on conceptual advances in chemical carcinogenesis research and describes to a limited extent the experimental data upon which they are founded. Carcinogenesis is evaluated as a multistage process in which the summation of events is required to produce a cancer. The first stage, initiation, is defined as the consequences of the initial interaction of a tissue with carcinogen. Promotion, the second stage, is confined to those processes which facilitate the expression of the initiated phenotype at the tissue level. Promotion may result from the influence of promoting agents on the entire tissue or on the initiated cells.

References (337)

  • C.L. Ashendel

    Biochim. Biophys. Acta

    (1985)
  • M. Bichara et al.

    J. Mol. Biol.

    (1985)
  • P.M. Blumberg et al.

    Biochem. Pharmacol.

    (1984)
  • G.T. Bowden et al.

    Biochim. Biophys. Acta

    (1979)
  • R.L. Brinster et al.

    Celf

    (1984)
  • M. Castagna et al.

    J. Biol. Chem.

    (1982)
  • M. Chatterjee et al.

    Cancer Lett.

    (1982)
  • S.R. Coughlin et al.

    Cell

    (1985)
  • L. Diamond et al.

    Adv. Cancer Res.

    (1980)
  • A. Dipple et al.

    Pharmacol. Ther.

    (1985)
  • E. Farber

    Biochim. Biophys. Acta

    (1980)
  • E. Farber

    Biochim. Biophys. Acta

    (1984)
  • E. Farber et al.

    Adv. Cancer Res.

    (1980)
  • P.J. Fialkow

    Biochim. Biophys. Acta

    (1976)
  • P.B. Fisher et al.

    Cell

    (1979)
  • J.M. Adams et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1985)
  • B.L. Allen-Hoffman et al.

    Proc. Nod. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (1984)
  • E. Amtmann et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1982)
  • J.P. Arcoleo et al.

    Carcinogenesis

    (1985)
  • P. Armitage

    Environ. Health Perspect.

    (1985)
  • H. Autrup et al.
  • N. Baba et al.

    Rag. Exp. Tumor Res.

    (1967)
  • A. Balmain

    Br. J. Cancer.

    (1985)
  • A. Balmain et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1983)
  • A. Balmain et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1984)
  • M. Bano et al.

    Cancer Res.

    (1984)
  • J.C. Barrett et al.

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (1978)
  • F.F. Becker

    Cancer Res.

    (1975)
  • F.F. Becker

    Cancer Res.

    (1985)
  • D.G. Beer et al.

    Cancer Res.

    (1986)
  • F.A. Beland et al.

    Environ. Health Perspect.

    (1985)
  • F.A. Beland et al.

    Environ. Health Perspect.

    (1983)
  • W.F. Benedict et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1975)
  • H.A. Bern et al.

    J. Toxicol. Environ. Health (Suppl.)

    (1976)
  • J.S. Bertram et al.

    Cancer Res.

    (1974)
  • Y. Berwald et al.

    J. Natl. Cancer Inst.

    (1965)
  • P.M. Blumberg

    CRC Crit. Rev. Toxicol.

    (1980)
  • P.M. Blumberg

    CRC Crit. Rev. Toxicol.

    (1981)
  • P.M. Blumberg et al.

    Carcinogencsis

    (1982)
  • C. Borek

    Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.

    (1983)
  • J.D. Brown et al.

    Carcinogenesis

    (1983)
  • M.K. Buening et al.

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (1978)
  • J.A. Burgess et al.

    Cancer Res.

    (1985)
  • D.K. Burnham et al.

    J. Natl. Cancer Inst.

    (1986)
  • F. Burns et al.

    Environ. Health Perspect.

    (1983)
  • F.J. Burns et al.

    Cancer Res.

    (1976)
  • W. Bursch et al.

    Carcinopenesis

    (1984)
  • W.F. Busby et al.
  • C.J. Calleman et al.

    J. Environ. Pathol. Toxicol.

    (1978)
  • B.I. Carr et al.

    Cancer Res.

    (1981)
  • Cited by (257)

    • Role of animal research in human malignancies

      2019, Animal Models in Cancer Drug Discovery
    • Bioactive Natural Products From the Genus Kalanchoe as Cancer Chemopreventive Agents: A Review

      2018, Studies in Natural Products Chemistry
      Citation Excerpt :

      Next, in vivo assays imply the use of animal models, usually rodents, to monitor carcinogenesis inhibition. In contrast to chemical carcinogen-induced models used in the last decades [112], transgenic rodent models are used nowadays, since they were found more relevant to the better understanding of human carcinogenesis complexity [113]. One of the best examples is Apcmin mice, a mutant model affecting APC gene functionality, which induces intestinal adenomas and simulates, with high fidelity, physiopathological conditions associated with human colon carcinogenesis [114].

    • Bulky DNA Adducts, Tobacco Smoking, Genetic Susceptibility, and Lung Cancer Risk

      2017, Advances in Clinical Chemistry
      Citation Excerpt :

      These are well-known carcinogens present in cigarette smoke and motor vehicle exhaust and fumes from industrial processes and residential heating [7–9]. Interest in the analysis of the bulky DNA adducts is derived from early experimental animal models that demonstrated that DNA damage is necessary but insufficient for cancer development [2,10,11]. At the beginning of the 21st century, most evidence supported the notion that exposure to environmental carcinogens [3,5,12–28], including cigarette smoke [1,3,5,29–35], resulted in alterations to the structural integrity of DNA, i.e., bulky DNA adducts and oxidative DNA damage [1,12,19,36–46].

    • Cloning and characterization of neoplasia-related genes in flat oyster Ostrea edulis

      2014, Infection, Genetics and Evolution
      Citation Excerpt :

      Neoplastic cells show impaired defence systems, as well as a lack of adhesion, spreading and phagocyte behaviour (Beckmann et al., 1992; Diaz et al., 2011). Basic underlying mechanisms of carcinogenesis are evolutionary conserved (Yuspa and Poirier, 1988) and highly conserved domains of neoplasia-related genes suggest that their functional roles may also be conserved (Ciocan and Rotchell, 2005). The molecular mechanisms of cancer are based on an uncontrolled cell growth and loss of cell’s ability to undergo apoptosis (Hanahan and Weinberg, 2000).

    • Chemical-induced Carcinogenesis

      2013, Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine(Taiwan)
      Citation Excerpt :

      When the tumor promoter disappears, regression of the tumor occurs, possibly through apoptosis mechanisms. Some tumor promoters are tissue-specific, but others act simultaneously on several different tissues.34 A long-term and/or high-dose exposure, a tumor promoter can sometimes induce preneoplasms and neoplasms even without initiation stimuli.11

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text