Advertisement

Carcinogenic Drugs and their Relevance in Risk Assessment

  • D. Schmähl
  • B. Bunk
Conference paper
Part of the Veröffentlichungen aus der Geomedizinischen Forschungsstelle der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften book series (HD AKAD, volume 1991 / 1991/1)

Abstract

Today drug-induced effects and diseases are gaining in significance because the number of drugs and their uses are increasing constantly (Schmähl & Habs 1980). Meanwhile induction of cancer in human beings by medical treatment has been described frequently although the detection of carcinogenic activity of a drug often turns out to be problematic. On the one hand the induction time of a drug-induced carcinoma usually takes many years or even decades wherefore it is almost impossible to trace back the cause of the carcinoma on the other hand treatment with drugs often is a combination of several drugs and not a monotherapy what makes it difficult to attribute the carcinogenic action to one certain drug. However, more and more drugs have been suspected to act carcinogenicly (Table 1) and it is known from the observation of clinical cases, from epidemiological studies as well as from animal experiments which drugs or drug groups have to be regarded as potentially carcinogenic for man (Schmähl 1981).

Keywords

Natl Cancer Inst Alkylating Agent Renal Pelvis Induction Time Carcinogenic Effect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brock N, Schneider B, Stekar J, Pohl J (1989) Experimental investigations into the carcinogenic effect of antitumor and immunosuppressive agents. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 115:309–328.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cadman EC, Capizzi RL, Bertino JR (1977) Acute nonlymphocytic leukemia. A delayed complication of Hodgkin’s disease therapy: Analysis of 109 cases. Cancer 40:1280–1296.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chabner BA (1977) Second neoplasm — a complication of cancer chemotherapy. New Engl J Med 297: 213–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DeVita VT, Arseneau JC, Sherins RJ, Canellos GP, Young RC (1973) Intensive chemotherapy for Hodgkin’s disease: Long-term complications, in: Natl Cancer Inst Monograph 36, pp 447–454.Google Scholar
  5. Ehlers G (1968) Klinische und histologische Untersuchungen zur Frage arzneimittelbedingter Arsen-Tumoren. Zschr Haut Geschl Krkh 43, 18: 763–774.Google Scholar
  6. Fierz U (1965) Katamnestische Untersuchungen über die Nebenwirkungen der Therapie mit anorganischem Arsen bei Hautkrankheiten. Dermatologica 131: 41–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hultengren N, Lagergren C, Ljungqvist A (1965) Carcinoma of the renal pelvis in renal papillary necrosis. Acta chir Scand 130: 314–320.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hutchinson J (1905) On some examples of arsenic keratosis of the skin and arsenic cancer. Tr Path Soc (London) 39: 277.Google Scholar
  9. IARC — International Agency for Research on Cancer (1980) Some pharmacological drugs. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risk Chem Hum (Suppl) 24:135–161.Google Scholar
  10. Lee AM, Fraumeni JF (1969) Arsenic and respiratory cancer in man: An occupational study. J Natl Cancer Inst 42: 1045–1052.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Leistenschneider W, Nagel R, Steffens J (1983) Nierenbeckentumoren und Phenacetinabusus. Akt Ural 14: 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McLaughlin JK, Blot WJ, Mehl ES, Fraumeni JF Jr (1985) Relation of analgesic use to renal cancer: Population-based findings. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 69: 217–222.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Meyhöfer W, Knoth W (1966) Über die Auswirkung einer langjährigen antipsoriatischen Arsentherapie auf mehrere Organe unter besonderer Berücksichtigung andrologischer Befunde. Hautarzt 17: 309–313.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Paris JA (1820) Pharmacologica Ed 3, pp 132–134, London: Phillips 1820.Google Scholar
  15. Schmähl D (1967) Karzinogene Wirkung von Cyclophosphamid und Triazichon bei Ratten. Dtsch Med Wschr 92: 1150–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schmähl D (1981) latrogenic carcinogenesis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 99:71–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schmähl D (1990) Carcinogenic effects of immunosuppressive drugs in man, in: De novo cancers in organ transplant patients, Penn I and Schmähl D (eds), Springer Verlag Heidelberg, in press.Google Scholar
  18. Schmähl D, Habs M (1980) Drug-induced cancer, in: Current topics in Pathology, Volume 69, Drug-Induced Pathology, edited by: E. Grundmann, Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  19. Schmähl D, Kaldor JM (ed) (1986) Carcinogenicity of alkylating cytostatics drugs. IARC Sci Publ 78, IARC Lyon.Google Scholar
  20. Schmähl D, Osswald H (1970) Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die carcinogenen Wirkungen von Krebschemotherapeutika und Immunsuppressiva. Arzneim Forsch (Drug Res) 20: 1461–1467.Google Scholar
  21. Schmähl D, Petru E (1986) Zweittumoren nach cytostatischer Therapie mit Alkylantien beim Menschen; toxikologische Gesichtspunkte. Dtsch Med Wschr 111: 833–836.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Senn HJ, Barett-Mahler AR, Jungi WF, Osako (1989) Adjuvant chemotherapy with LMF+BCG in node-negative and node-positive breast cancer patients: 10 years results. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 25: 513–525.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tucker MA, Meadows AT, Boice JR, Stovall M et al (1987) Leukemia after therapy with alkylating agents for childhood cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 78: 459–464.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Vathaire F, Francois P, Hill C, Schweisguth O, Rodary C, Sarrazin D et al (1989) Role of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in the risk of second malignant neoplasms after cancer in childhood. Br J Cancer 59: 792–796.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Schmähl
    • 1
  • B. Bunk
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Toxicology and ChemotherapyGerman Cancer Research CenterHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations