1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0959-8049(98)00124-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

VI.6 Detection of DNA adducts in the human endometrium: a lack of evidence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This idea gains support from our observation that even the adding of an external activating system did not appreciably influence DNA adduction in the human endometrial carcinoma cells (Figure 6). Our overall findings confirm the previously determined tamoxifen-DNA adducts in the genomic DNA of the liver (24) and the nondetectability or equivocal detectability of these adducts in the genomic DNA of the endometrium (16,17,(25)(26)(27) from tamoxifen-treated patients.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This idea gains support from our observation that even the adding of an external activating system did not appreciably influence DNA adduction in the human endometrial carcinoma cells (Figure 6). Our overall findings confirm the previously determined tamoxifen-DNA adducts in the genomic DNA of the liver (24) and the nondetectability or equivocal detectability of these adducts in the genomic DNA of the endometrium (16,17,(25)(26)(27) from tamoxifen-treated patients.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The widely utilized 32 P-postlabelingbased assays have used dissimilar digestion of DNA and variable adduct enrichment and chromatographic procedures in different studies. Additionally, incomparable phosphorylation efficiencies as well as the use (versus not using) of authentic DNA adduct standards have contributed to this uncertainty (16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27). Regardless of these discrepancies, a common feature of all applied assays is the detection of tamoxifen-DNA adducts in the overall genome but not at the level of nucleotide resolution.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, binding of [ 14 C]tamoxifen to endometrial DNA has been demonstrated by accelerator mass spectrometry, following treatment of women with a single 14 C-labeled therapeutic dose (10), which highlights the need to understand the consequences of tamoxifen DNA adduct formation in human cells. This is however a contentious issue because other investigators have failed to find evidence of tamoxifen DNA adduct formation in endometrial tissue of treated patients, using both 32 P-postlabeling (11,12) and electrospray mass spectrometry analysis (13). Reported differences in the level of tamoxifen adducts in uterine samples from women receiving tamoxifen, particularly an absence of detectable adducts in half of the patients examined in one study (8), have been suggested as being due to individual variability in the extent of metabolic activation or DNA repair capacity.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the diastereoisomers, a trans form (fr-2) of dG-N 2 -TAM and dG-N 2 -N-desTAM were detected as a major TAM-DNA adduct in rodents (11)(12)(13) and monkeys (14,15). TAM-DNA adducts were also detected in the endometrium of women treated with TAM (16)(17)(18), although there is some contradiction regarding the detection of TAM-DNA adducts in human tissues (19)(20)(21)(22). A high frequency of K-ras mutations was recently observed in the endometrium of women treated with TAM (23); the mutational specificity was consistent with that occurring at the dG-N 2 -TAM adduct (24).…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%