Toxicologic Pathology

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Oesch, F.
Right arrow Articles by Arand, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Oesch, F.
Right arrow Articles by Arand, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Toxicologic Pathology, Vol. 28, No. 3, 382-387 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/019262330002800305

Metabolic Detoxification: Implications for Thresholds

Franz Oesch

Institute of Toxicology, University of Mainz, Obere Zahlbacher Strasse 67, D-55131 Mainz, Germany

Maria Elena Herrero

Institute of Toxicology, University of Mainz, Obere Zahlbacher Strasse 67, D-55131 Mainz, Germany

Jan Georg Hengstler

Institute of Toxicology, University of Mainz, Obere Zahlbacher Strasse 67, D-55131 Mainz, Germany

Matthias Lohmann

Institute of Toxicology, University of Mainz, Obere Zahlbacher Strasse 67, D-55131 Mainz, Germany

Michael Arand

Institute of Toxicology, University of Mainz, Obere Zahlbacher Strasse 67, D-55131 Mainz, Germany

The fact that chemical carcinogenesis involves single, isolated, essentially irreversible molecular events as discrete steps, several of which must occur in a row to finally culminate in the development of a malignancy, rather suggests that an absolute threshold for chemical carcinogens may not exist. However, practical thresholds may exist due to saturable pathways involved in the metabolic processing, especially in the metabolic inactivation, of such compounds. An important example for such a pathway is the enzymatic hydrolysis of epoxides via epoxide hydrolases, a group of enzymes for which the catalytic mechanism has recently been established. These enzymes convert their substrates via the intermediate formation of a covalent enzyme-substrate complex. Interestingly, the formation of the intermediate proceeds faster by orders of magnitude than the subsequent hydrolysis, ie, the formation of the terminal product. Under normal circumstances, this does not pose a problem, since the microsomal epoxide hydrolase (mEH), the epoxide hydrolases with the best documented importance in the metabolism of carcinogens, is highly abundant in the liver, the organ with the highest capacity to metabolically generate epoxides. Computer simulation provides evidence that the high amount of mEH enzyme is favorable for the control of the steady-state level of a substrate epoxide and can keep it extremely low. However, once the mEH is titrated out under conditions of extraordinarily high epoxide concentration, the epoxide steady-state level steeply rises, leading to a sudden burst of the genotoxic effect of the noxious agent. This prediction of the computer simulation is nicely supported by experimental work. V79 Chinese hamster cells that we have genetically engineered to express human mEH at about the same level as that observed in human liver are completely protected from any measurable genotoxic effect of the model compound styrene oxide (STO) up to a dose of 100 µM in the cell culture medium (toxicokinetic threshold). In V79 cells that do not express mEH, STO leads to the formation of DNA strand breaks in a dose-dependent manner with no toxicokinetic threshold observable. Above 100 µM, the genotoxic effect of STO in the mEH-expressing cell line parallels the one in the parental cell line. Thus, the saturable protection from STO-induced strand breaks by mEH represents a typical example of a practical threshold. However, it must be pointed out that even in the presence of protective amounts of mEH, a minute but definite level of STO is present that does not contribute sufficiently to the strand break formation to overcome the background noise of the detection procedure. As pointed out above, absolute thresholds probably do not exist in chemical carcinogenesis.

Key Words: Epoxide hydrolase • {alpha}/β hydrolase fold • ester intermediate • epoxy compounds metabolism • V79 Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts • DNA damage • genotoxicity


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Mol. Pharmacol.Home page
S.-H. Liang, C. Hassett, and C. J. Omiecinski
Alternative Promoters Determine Tissue-Specific Expression Profiles of the Human Microsomal Epoxide Hydrolase Gene (EPHX1)
Mol. Pharmacol., January 1, 2005; 67(1): 220 - 230.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
M. Hoshi, K. Morimura, H. Wanibuchi, M. Wei, E. Okochi, T. Ushijima, K. Takaoka, and S. Fukushima
No-Observed Effect Levels for Carcinogenicity and for in vivo Mutagenicity of a Genotoxic Carcinogen
Toxicol. Sci., October 1, 2004; 81(2): 273 - 279.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol PatholHome page
L. Tryphonas and C. Gopinath
A Synopsis of the Third International Federation of Societies of Toxicologic Pathologists Conference
Toxicol Pathol, May 1, 2000; 28(3): 370 - 374.
[PDF]