FASEB J.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schut, H. A.
Right arrow Articles by Shiverick, K. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schut, H. A.
Right arrow Articles by Shiverick, K. T.

The FASEB Journal, Vol 6, 2942-2951, Copyright © 1992 by The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology

REVIEWS

DNA adducts in humans as dosimeters of exposure to environmental, occupational, or dietary genotoxins

HA Schut and KT Shiverick
Department of Pathology, Medical College of Ohio, Toledo 43699.

The quantitation of adducts of genotoxins with DNA is probably one of the best indicators of genetic damage due to exposure to toxins or carcinogens. It is generally believed that such adducts can lead to mutations, which in turn can trigger the initiation of the carcinogenic process. DNA adducts have been quantitated in white blood cells and in various tissues of smokers, persons in certain high-exposure occupations, and persons consuming foods contaminated with certain carcinogens. The feasibility of this approach for biochemical epidemiologic studies has been demonstrated using methods such as 32P- postlabeling, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and synchronous fluorescence spectrophotometry. Relatively large interindividual differences in DNA adducts have been observed in both exposed and nonexposed persons. As a result, there are only a few studies in which clear quantitative and qualitative differences between these two groups have been observed. In addition, it appears that in some studies the 32P-postlabeling method does not detect the presence of the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon DNA adducts that are detectable by immunoassays. More extensive studies in additional populations at risk should shed further light on the utility of DNA adduct analysis in biochemical monitoring, especially if further refinements in methodology would result in increased sensitivity and specificity.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
M. C. Poirier, R. M. Santella, and A. Weston
Carcinogen macromolecular adducts and their measurement
Carcinogenesis, March 1, 2000; 21(3): 353 - 359.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
J. K. Wiencke, S. W. Thurston, K. T. Kelsey, A. Varkonyi, J. C. Wain, E. J. Mark, and D. C. Christiani
Early Age at Smoking Initiation and Tobacco Carcinogen DNA Damage in the Lung
J Natl Cancer Inst, April 7, 1999; 91(7): 614 - 619.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
H. A.J. Schut and E. G. Snyderwine
DNA adducts of heterocyclic amine food mutagens: implications for mutagenesis and carcinogenesis
Carcinogenesis, March 1, 1999; 20(3): 353 - 368.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
H. J. Helbock, K. B. Beckman, M. K. Shigenaga, P. B. Walter, A. A. Woodall, H. C. Yeo, and B. N. Ames
DNA oxidation matters: The HPLC-electrochemical detection assay of 8-oxo-deoxyguanosine and 8-oxo-guanine
PNAS, January 6, 1998; 95(1): 288 - 293.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1992 by The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.