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 (101)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by De Flora, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by De Flora, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Carcinogenesis, Vol. 21, No. 4, 533-541, April 2000
© 2000 Oxford University Press


Commentary

Threshold mechanisms and site specificity in chromium(VI) carcinogenesis

Silvio De Flora

Department of Health Sciences, Section of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, University of Genoa, via A. Pastore 1, I-16132 Genoa, Italy

Ten years have elapsed since the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) evaluated the carcinogenicity of chromium and chromium compounds. Further studies performed during the last decade have provided further epidemiological, experimental and mechanistic data which support the IARC conclusions. A wealth of results indicate that, at variance with chromium(0) and chromium(III), chromium(VI) can induce a variety of genetic and related effects in vitro. The lack of carcinogenicity of chromium(0) and chromium(III) compounds in experimental animals is well established, and only a minority of animal carcinogenicity data with chromium(VI) compounds were positive (30 out of 70, i.e. 42.9%). Moreover, most positive studies used administration routes which do not mimic any human exposure and by-pass physiological defense mechanisms. Typically, positive results were only obtained at implantation sites and at the highest dose tested. Exposure to chromium(VI) has been known for more than a century to be associated with induction of cancer in humans. Carcinogenicity requires massive exposures, as is only encountered in well defined occupational settings, and is site specific, being specifically targeted to the lung and, in some cases, to the sinonasal cavity. Increased death rates for cancers at other sites, which were occasionally reported in some epidemiological studies, were almost invariably not statistically significant, and inconsistent (being counterbalanced by other studies which apparently showed decreased rates for the same cancers). As we recently quantified in human body compartments, chromium(VI) can be reduced in body fluids and non-target cells, which results in its detoxification, due to the poor ability of chromium(III) to cross cell membranes. In target cells, chromium(VI) tends to be metabolized by a network of mechanisms leading to generation of reduced chromium species and reactive oxygen species, which will result either in activation or in detoxification depending on the site of the intracellular reduction and its proximity to DNA. When introduced by the oral route, chromium(VI) is efficiently detoxified upon reduction by saliva and gastric juice, and sequestration by intestinal bacteria. If some chromium(VI) is absorbed by the intestine, it is massively reduced in the blood of the portal system and then in the liver. These mechanisms explain the lack of genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, and induction of other long-term health effects of chromium (VI) by the oral route. Within the respiratory tract, chromium(VI) is reduced in the epithelial-lining fluid, pulmonary alveolar macrophages, bronchial tree and peripheral lung parenchyma cells. Hence, lung cancer can only be induced when chromium(VI) doses overwhelm these defense mechanisms. The efficient uptake and reduction of chromium(VI) in red blood cells explains its lack of carcinogenicity at a distance from the portal of entry into the body. All experimental and epidemiological data, and the underlying mechanisms, point to the occurrence of thresholds in chromium(VI) carcinogenesis.


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
MicrobiologyHome page
C. Viti, F. Decorosi, A. Mini, E. Tatti, and L. Giovannetti
Involvement of the oscA gene in the sulphur starvation response and in Cr(VI) resistance in Pseudomonas corrugata 28
Microbiology, January 1, 2009; 155(1): 95 - 105.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CarcinogenesisHome page
M. Reynolds and A. Zhitkovich
Cellular vitamin C increases chromate toxicity via a death program requiring mismatch repair but not p53
Carcinogenesis, July 1, 2007; 28(7): 1613 - 1620.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nucleic Acids ResHome page
M. Reynolds, L. Stoddard, I. Bespalov, and A. Zhitkovich
Ascorbate acts as a highly potent inducer of chromate mutagenesis and clastogenesis: linkage to DNA breaks in G2 phase by mismatch repair
Nucleic Acids Res., January 28, 2007; 35(2): 465 - 476.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
N. Azad, V. Vallyathan, L. Wang, V. Tantishaiyakul, C. Stehlik, S. S. Leonard, and Y. Rojanasakul
S-Nitrosylation of Bcl-2 Inhibits Its Ubiquitin-Proteasomal Degradation: A NOVEL ANTIAPOPTOTIC MECHANISM THAT SUPPRESSES APOPTOSIS
J. Biol. Chem., November 10, 2006; 281(45): 34124 - 34134.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CarcinogenesisHome page
G. Quievryn, J. Messer, and A. Zhitkovich
Lower mutagenicity but higher stability of Cr-DNA adducts formed during gradual chromate activation with ascorbate
Carcinogenesis, November 1, 2006; 27(11): 2316 - 2321.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
Z. Kirpnick-Sobol, R. Reliene, and R. H. Schiestl
Carcinogenic Cr(VI) and the Nutritional Supplement Cr(III) Induce DNA Deletions in Yeast and Mice.
Cancer Res., April 1, 2006; 66(7): 3480 - 3484.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mineral MagHome page
J. H. Duffus
Chemical speciation terminology: chromium chemistry and cancer
Mineralogical Magazine, October 1, 2005; 69(5): 557 - 562.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
MutagenesisHome page
K. Danadevi, R. Rozati, B.S. Banu, and P. Grover
Genotoxic evaluation of welders occupationally exposed to chromium and nickel using the Comet and micronucleus assays
Mutagenesis, January 1, 2004; 19(1): 35 - 41.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Occup. Environ. Med.Home page
R S Luippold, K A Mundt, R P Austin, E Liebig, J Panko, C Crump, K Crump, and D Proctor
Lung cancer mortality among chromate production workers
Occup. Environ. Med., June 1, 2003; 60(6): 451 - 457.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
International Journal of ToxicologyHome page
R. A. Howd
Can We Protect Everybody from Drinking Water Contaminants?
International Journal of Toxicology, September 1, 2002; 21(5): 389 - 395.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
MutagenesisHome page
M. Huvinen, A. Makitie, H. Jarventaus, H. Wolff, T. Stjernvall, A. Hovi, A. Hirvonen, R. Ranta, M. Nurminen, and H. Norppa
Nasal cell micronuclei, cytology and clinical symptoms in stainless steel production workers exposed to chromium
Mutagenesis, September 1, 2002; 17(5): 425 - 429.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CarcinogenesisHome page
F. D'Agostini, A. Izzotti, C. Bennicelli, A. Camoirano, E. Tampa, and S. De Flora
Induction of apoptosis in the lung but not in the liver of rats receiving intra-tracheal instillations of chromium(VI)
Carcinogenesis, April 1, 2002; 23(4): 587 - 593.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
E. J. O'Flaherty, B. D. Kerger, S. M. Hays, and D. J. Paustenbach
A Physiologically Based Model for the Ingestion of Chromium(III) and Chromium(VI) by Humans
Toxicol. Sci., April 1, 2001; 60(2): 196 - 213.
[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.