Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
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 ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yu, R. C.-T.
Right arrow Articles by Li, J.-H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yu, R. C.-T.
Right arrow Articles by Li, J.-H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Carcinogenesis, Vol. 20, No. 7, 1193-1199, July 1999
© 1999 Oxford University Press


Cancer Biology

Genetic toxicity of cocaine

Ricky Chang-Tze Yu1, Te-Chang Lee2, T.C. Wang3 and Jih-Heng Li1,4,5

1 Institute of Genetics, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan,
2 Institute of Biomedical Sciences and
3 Institute of Zoology, Academia Sinica and
4 National Narcotics Bureau, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China

Cocaine is a widely abused drug. Recently, it has been shown to induce teratogenesis in both humans and animals. Cocaine-induced teratogenicity has been associated with reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are generated by cytochrome P450 during cocaine biotransformation. Since ROS have been reported to induce genotoxicity, it is of interest to know whether cocaine and/or its metabolites are also genotoxic. In this study, Chinese hamster ovary K1 cells were employed as a model system to investigate the genetic toxicity of cocaine in the presence or absence of rat liver S9 fraction. Cocaine-induced cytotoxicity was potentiated when S9 was present, indicating the cytochrome P450 metabolism plays a role in cocaine-mediated cytotoxicity. Cocaine treatments per se induced a few chromosome aberrations while treatments of cocaine plus S9 caused a significant increase in chromosome aberrations. In contrast, cocaine induced micronuclei (MN) formation and hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase mutation only in the presence of S9. Therefore, cocaine itself is at best a weak clastogen, whereas metabolite(s) of cocaine is/are truly inducer(s) of clastogenesis and mutagenesis. Cocaine treatments alone also induced a significant increase in sister chromatid exchange frequency but the addition of S9 did not affect the results. Free radical scavengers, including superoxide dismutase and catalase, efficiently decreased the frequency of cocaine plus S9-induced MN, implying that ROS are indeed important components in cocaine-induced genotoxicity. The observation that non-toxic doses of cocaine can inhibit intercellular metabolic cooperation suggests that cocaine may also be a tumor promoter. Our data supports that cocaine could possess genotoxicity in addition to its well-known neurotoxicity and teratogenicity.

Abbreviations: 6-TG, 6-thioguanine; BrdU, 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine; CA, chromosome aberration; hgprt, hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase; MN, micronuclei; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SCE, sister-chromatid exchange; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TPA, 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate.

5 To whom correspondence should be addressed at National Narcotics Bureau, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, 6 Lin-Sheng South Road, Taipei, Taiwan Email: nbjhligt{at}ms3.hinet.net


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
MutagenesisHome page
M. Fenech
The Genome Health Clinic and Genome Health Nutrigenomics concepts: diagnosis and nutritional treatment of genome and epigenome damage on an individual basis
Mutagenesis, July 1, 2005; 20(4): 255 - 269.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.