In Vitro Analysis of Mammalian Cells Exposed In Vitro and In Vivo to Airborne Agents
Airborne genotoxic agents consitute a major environmental hazard. A reflection of this hazard is the fact that lung cancer constitutes the greatest cause of cancer deaths in men and, disturbingly, is rapidly increasing in women as well (1). Genotoxic airborne agents such as gaseous and particulate agents from industrial wastes, automobile exhaust, cigarette smoke and many mining and manufacturing processes (2,3) constitute the most important sources of exposure.
KeywordsVortex Ozone Rubber Respiration Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.E. S. Pollack and J. W. Horn, Trends in Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the United States, 1969–76, Proc. Natl, Acad. Sci. 64 (5): 1091–1103 (1980).Google Scholar
- 6.S. Wolff and P. Perry, Differential Giemsa Staining of Sister Chromatids and the Study of Sister Chromatid Exchanges without Autoradiography, Chromosoma 48:341– 353 (1974).Google Scholar
- 7.U. Saffiotti, F. Cefis and L. H. Kolb, A Method for the Experimental Induction of Bronchogenic Carcinoma, Cancer Res. 28: 104–124 (1968).Google Scholar
- 8.R. R. Guerrero, D. E. Rounds and K. S. Narayan, The Use of CHO Cells in Intact Hamster Lungs to Test the Effect of In Vivo Application of Airborne Mutagens, Presented at the EPA Second Symposium on the Analysis of Complex Environment Mixtures, Williamsburg, Virginia (1980).Google Scholar
- 11.J. M. Mass and D. G. Kaufman, [3H] Benzo(a)pyrene Metabolism in Tracheal Epithelium Microsomes and Tracheal Organ Cultures, Cancer Res. 38: 3861–3866 (1978).Google Scholar
- 12.S. K. Yang, H. V. Gelboin, B. F. Trump, H. Autrup and C. C. Harris, Metabolic Activation of Benzo(a)pyrene and Binding to DNA in Cultured Human Bronchus, Cancer Res. 37 (4): 1210–1215 (1977).Google Scholar
- 14.R. R. Guerrero, D. E. Rounds and T. C. Hall, Bioassay Procedure for the Detection of Mutagenic Metabolites in Human Urine with Use of Sister Chromatid Exchange Analysis, J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 62 (4): 805–809 (1979).Google Scholar