Skip Navigation

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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feron, V.J.
Right arrow Articles by Spit, B.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feron, V.J.
Right arrow Articles by Spit, B.J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1985 Oxford University Press

other

Pulmonary response of hamsters to fibrous glass: chronic effects of repeated intratracheal instillation with or without benzo[a]pyrene

V.J. Feron 1, P.M. Scherrenberg, H.R. Immel and B.J. Spit

TNO-CIVO Toxicology and Nutrition Institute P.O. Box 360, 3700 AJ Zeist, The Netherlands

1To whom reprint requests should be sent

Syrian golden hamsters were given intratracheal instillations of glass fibres with or without benzo[a]pyrene suspended in saline, once a fortnight for 52 weeks. The experiment was terminated at week 85. ‘Silicotic granulomas’ consisting of tightly packed, iron-positive macrophages filled with glass fibres and surrounded by a layer of alveolar epithelial cells were the predominant pulmonary lesion. No mesotheliomas or other tumours of the respiratory tract were observed in hamsters treated with glass fibres alone. There was no indication that glass fibres enhanced the development of respiratory tract tumours induced by benzo[a]pyrene. In hamsters similarly exposed to crocidolite fibres with or without benzo[a]pyrene no mesotheliomas or other respiratory, tract tumours were observed either. An explanation for the absence of pulmonary tumours might be that repeated administration of fibres over a period of 52 weeks entails an acute pulmonary reaction after each administration with the implication that the fibres cannot settle down well enough to be able to induce tumours. Another possible explanation is the relatively short duration of the experimental period.


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




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.