1997
DOI: 10.1038/nm0597-510
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sunlight and skin cancer: Inhibition of p53 mutations in UV-irradiated mouse skin by sunscreens

Abstract: UV-induced mutations in the p53 tumor suppressor gene play an essential role in skin cancer development. We report here that such mutations can be detected in UV-irradiated mouse skin months before the gross appearance of skin tumors. Application of SPF-15 sunscreens to mouse skin before each UV irradiation nearly abolished the frequency of p53 mutations. These results indicate that p53 mutation is an early event in UV skin carcinogenesis and that inhibition of this event may serve as an early end point for as… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

5
155
0
5

Year Published

1998
1998
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 207 publications
(165 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
5
155
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…To date, the biological activity of sunscreens in offering protection against erythema has been represented through the use of a Sun Protection Factor (SPF). Some investigators have recently shown that SPF is not an adequate gauge when evaluating a sunscreen's ability to protect against UV-induced biological activity, and they propose estimating the protective activity of sunscreen through the use of other categories [10,11,[22][23][24]. In this study we examined Drosophila systems to determine if a genotoxicity protection factor could be utilized as an alternative evaluation of the efficacy of a sunscreen.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To date, the biological activity of sunscreens in offering protection against erythema has been represented through the use of a Sun Protection Factor (SPF). Some investigators have recently shown that SPF is not an adequate gauge when evaluating a sunscreen's ability to protect against UV-induced biological activity, and they propose estimating the protective activity of sunscreen through the use of other categories [10,11,[22][23][24]. In this study we examined Drosophila systems to determine if a genotoxicity protection factor could be utilized as an alternative evaluation of the efficacy of a sunscreen.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gill and Kim proposed the Immune Protection Factor (IPF) as a measure of the effectiveness of a sunscreen to protect against UV-induced immune suppression [9]. Ananthaswamy et al proposed the Mutation Protection Factor (MPF) as an estimate of a sunscreen's protective activity, as obtained through the measurement of p53 mutation in the skin of mice irradiated with UVB [10]. It has also been shown that treatment with sunscreen reduced the incidence of tumors in the skin of mice irradiated by a solar simulator [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Oral consumption of ␣-difluoromethylornithine, an irreversible specific inhibitor of ODC, in the drinking water (1% w/v) to the transgenic mice resulted in complete prevention of UVB-mediated tumorigenesis and a substantial decrease in the formation of pigmented cysts Excessive exposure of skin to ultraviolet (UV) light, particularly in the middle wavelength range (UVB; 290 to 320 nm), elicits a variety of adverse effects that include skin aging, cutaneous inflammation, erythema, immunosuppression, cell death, and skin cancer. [1][2][3][4][5][6] More than a million new cases of nonmelanoma skin cancers, which include basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (both derived from epidermal keratinocytes), are diagnosed annually in the United States. 6,7 Unlike chemically induced skin carcinogenesis, UV is a complete carcinogen with both tumor-initiating as well as tumorpromoting effects.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 5'?3' sequence is read from bottom to top Figure 2 p53 mutations at codon 270 arise early in UVirradiated XPC7/7 and XPC+/+ mouse skin. Mice were irradiated ®ve times per week (Monday through Friday) for 1 ± 4 weeks at a dose of 2.5 kJ/m 2 UVB per exposure from a bank of six FS40 sunlamps, as described before (Ananthaswamy et al, 1997). Epidermal DNA (360 ng) was ampli®ed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the mutant-speci®c primers 5'-GGACGGGACAGCTTTGAGGTTT-3' and 5'-GCCTGCG-TACCTCTCTTTGC-3', as described previously (Ananthaswamy et al, 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mice were irradiated ®ve times per week (Monday through Friday) for 1 ± 4 weeks at a dose of 2.5 kJ/m 2 UVB per exposure from a bank of six FS40 sunlamps, as described before (Ananthaswamy et al, 1997). Epidermal DNA (360 ng) was ampli®ed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the mutant-speci®c primers 5'-GGACGGGACAGCTTTGAGGTTT-3' and 5'-GCCTGCG-TACCTCTCTTTGC-3', as described previously (Ananthaswamy et al, 1997). An aliquot (5 ml) of the PCR product was electrophoresed on a 6% polyacrylamide gel, and the gel was dried and exposed to autoradiographic ®lm.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%