Glutathione S-transferase M1 polymorphism and lung cancer risk in African-Americans

Open Access
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
There remains a remarkable discordance between the results of observational epidemiological studies and intervention trials using β-carotene as a potential chemopreventive agent. One question that needs to be examined is whether the adverse outcomes of human β-carotene trials are related to the large doses of β-carotene that were administered. In the present study, ferrets were given a physiological (low) dose or a pharmacological (high) dose of β-carotene supplementation (0.43 mg versus 2.4 mg/kg body wt/day, which is equivalent to 6 mg versus 30 mg/day in humans) and exposed to cigarette smoke for 6 months. We investigated the effects of these doses of β-carotene on retinoid concentrations, expression of retinoic acid receptors (RARs), activator protein 1 (AP-1; c-Jun and c-Fos), cyclin D1, proliferating cellular nuclear antigen (PCNA), and histopathological changes in the lungs of both normal and cigarette smoke-exposed ferrets. Thirty-six male ferrets were treated in six groups—control, smoke-exposed (SM), low-dose β-carotene (LBC), high-dose β-carotene (HBC), low-dose β-carotene plus smoke exposure (LBC+SM) or high-dose β-carotene plus smoke exposure (HBC+SM)—for 6 months. Retinoic acid concentration and RARβ gene expression, but not expression of RARα and RARγ, was reduced in the lung tissue of HBC+SM, HBC, SM and LBC+SM ferrets, but not in that of LBC ferrets, as compared with the control group. Expression of AP-1 and PCNA was greater in HBC+SM, HBC, SM and LBC+SM ferrets, but not in the LBC ferrets, as compared with the control group. Increased amounts of cyclin D1 and keratinized squamous metaplasia were observed in the lung tissue of HBC+SM, HBC and SM groups but not in that of the LBC+SM, LBC or control groups. These data suggest that, in contrast with a pharmacological dose of β-carotene, a physiological dose of β-carotene in smoke-exposed ferrets has no potentially detrimental effects and may afford weak protection against lung damage induced by cigarette smoke.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: