2013
DOI: 10.1097/tp.0b013e3182a3dfa3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

No Acceleration of UV-Induced Skin Carcinogenesis from Evenly Spread Dietary Intake of Cyclosporine in Contrast to Oral Bolus Dosages

Abstract: Cyclosporine in bolus doses appears to increase skin cancer development, whereas cyclosporine administration more evenly spread over time does not. Extrapolation to transplant patients suggests that the mode of administrating cyclosporine may be crucial for the increased skin cancer risk and that this risk might be lowered with a more steady release of cyclosporine in the body.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the fact that immunosuppressed patients who switched from CsA to rapamycin dramatically reduced their risk of developing future SCCs (as long as they did not have multiple SCCs before conversion) is in alignment with the “intervention” model findings in Figure 2, which is supported by other treatment regimes [39, 41]. Additional studies in SKH-1 mice have found that dietary CsA exposure during UV protected against skin tumorigenesis, while post-UV dietary CsA had no effect and bolus treatments with the agent during UV increased tumor burden [46]. It is therefore possible that continuous versus intermittent dosing with rapamycin may also have differing effects on tumor outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 70%
“…In addition, the fact that immunosuppressed patients who switched from CsA to rapamycin dramatically reduced their risk of developing future SCCs (as long as they did not have multiple SCCs before conversion) is in alignment with the “intervention” model findings in Figure 2, which is supported by other treatment regimes [39, 41]. Additional studies in SKH-1 mice have found that dietary CsA exposure during UV protected against skin tumorigenesis, while post-UV dietary CsA had no effect and bolus treatments with the agent during UV increased tumor burden [46]. It is therefore possible that continuous versus intermittent dosing with rapamycin may also have differing effects on tumor outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 70%
“…The size of the immunosuppressed groups in this study was not designed to assess whether there is an effect of immunosuppression on tumor incidence and, therefore, we cannot draw any conclusions in this regard. Additionally, the administration regimen of CsA could have played a role in the lack of increased tumor formation, as it was recently shown in a UV-irradiated mouse model of skin cancer that CsA administered in a bolus rather than continuously is able to increase the number of tumors [56]. Nonetheless, we show that this vaccination strategy has credible potential in the difficult fight against skin lesions in immunosuppressed patients, especially those occurring in organ transplant recipients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Importantly, we were able to highlight the negative effects of using HCTZ in a population mainly treated with immunosuppressants belonging to the modern era, namely tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. Indeed, as stated above, direct UV-induced carcinogenic effects are well documented with azathioprine, the maintenance therapy historically used in kidney transplantation, but such effects have not been established for cyclosporin, tacrolimus, and mycophenolate mofetil (20,34). With improvements in surveillance, this likely explains why the risk of squamous cell carcinoma in solid organ transplant recipients has drastically decreased in recent decades from 65 to 250 times (3) compared with the general population to 20 times (35,36).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%