McGregor Douglas
Toxicity Evaluation Consultants, Aberdour, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Crit Rev Toxicol. 2007;37(10):887-914. doi: 10.1080/10408440701638970.
The toxicology of hydroquinone has been reviewed on a number of previous occasions. This review targets its potential for carcinogenicity and possible modes of carcinogenic action. The evaluation made by IARC (1999) of its carcinogenic risk to humans was that hydroquinone is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (Group 3). This evaluation was based on inadequate evidence in humans and limited evidence in experimental animals. The epidemiological information comes from four cohort studies involving occupational exposures. A cohort of lithographers, some of whom had worked with hydroquinone, had an excess of malignant melanoma based on five cases, but only two of the cases had reported exposure to hydroquinone. In a study of photographic processors the number of exposed individuals was uncertain and the numbers of cases of individual cancer sites were small. In view of the statistical power limitations of these studies for individual diagnostic categories of cancers, they are not considered to be informative with regard to the carcinogenicity of hydroquinone. A cohort of workers with definite and lengthy exposure to hydroquinone, during either its manufacture or its use, had low cancer rates compared with two comparison populations; the reason for the lower than expected rates is unclear. In a motion picture film processing cohort there were significant excess malignancies of the respiratory system among workers engaged in developing, where there was exposure to hydroquinone as well as other chemicals. There was no information on tobacco smoking habits and no dose-response relationship. Hydroquinone has been shown reproducibly to induce benign neoplasms in the kidneys of male F344 rats dosed orally either by gavage (25 and 50 mg/kg body weight) or diet (0.8%). The gavage study has been evaluated in considerable detail. This evaluation showed that all renal tubule adenomas and all cases of renal tubule atypical hyperplasia occurred in areas of severe or end-stage chronic progressive nephropathy and that the neoplasms were not otherwise confined to any particular part of the kidney. It is likely that the mode of carcinogenic action of hydroquinone is exacerbation of this natural disease process. Hydroquinone is mutagenic in vitro and in vivo, having caused genotoxicity or chromosomal aberrations in rodent bone-marrow cells. At least a portion, if not all, of the chromosomal effects are caused by interference by hydroquinone or its metabolites with chromosomal segregation, probably due to interaction with mitotic spindle proteins. However, the dose routes used to demonstrate these effects in almost all of the studies in vivo were intraperitoneal or subcutaneous injection, which were considered inappropriate. There were five studies by the oral route. These included a mouse bone-marrow cell micronucleus test in which a weak, marginally positive response was obtained following a single oral dose of 80 mg/kg body weight. The remaining oral route studies all showed no significant effect. They included a mouse bone-marrow cell micronucleus test in which there was no genotoxic activity after exposure to a diet containing 0.8% hydroquinone for 6 days; two (32)P-post-labeling assays, one with targets of Zymbal gland, liver, and spleen in Sprague-Dawley rats, the other with the kidney as target in F344 rats; and the last oral assay was for 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine adducts in F344 rat kidney DNA. Thus, the evidence (and the database) for any genotoxic effect in vivo is sparse and none has been observed in kidney. While glutathione conjugates could be responsible for the tumor induction, careful histology seems to show that the most actively toxic of several glutathione compounds tested, 2,3,5-triglutathion-S-yl hydroquinone, targets a very specific region of the kidney, the outer stripe of the outer medulla (OSOM), whereas hydroquinone-associated adenomas are more randomly distributed and occur in the cortex as well as the medulla. A nongenotoxic mode of action that involves exacerbation of a spontaneously occurring rodent renal disease, chronic progressive nephropathy (CPN), is proposed and evaluated. This disease is particularly prominent in male rats and the evidence is consistent with an absence of any human counterpart; therefore, the increased incidence of renal tubule adenomas in hydroquinone-dosed male rats is without human consequence.
对苯二酚的毒理学在之前已被多次综述。本次综述聚焦其致癌潜力及可能的致癌作用模式。国际癌症研究机构(IARC,1999年)对其对人类致癌风险的评估是,对苯二酚对人类的致癌性无法分类(第3组)。该评估基于人类证据不足以及实验动物证据有限。流行病学信息来自四项涉及职业暴露的队列研究。一组平版印刷工人中,部分人曾接触对苯二酚,基于五例病例,恶性黑色素瘤有超额发生,但其中仅两例报告接触过对苯二酚。在一项摄影冲洗工研究中,暴露个体数量不确定,各癌症部位的病例数较少。鉴于这些研究针对个别癌症诊断类别在统计学效能上的局限性,它们被认为对评估对苯二酚的致癌性并无参考价值。一组在对苯二酚制造或使用过程中有明确且长期暴露的工人,与两个对照人群相比癌症发生率较低;低于预期发生率的原因尚不清楚。在一个电影胶片冲洗队列中,从事显影工作的工人呼吸系统有显著超额恶性肿瘤发生,这些工人接触了对苯二酚以及其他化学物质。该研究未提供吸烟习惯信息,也不存在剂量 - 反应关系。已证实,通过灌胃(25和50毫克/千克体重)或饮食(0.8%)经口给药,对苯二酚可在雄性F344大鼠肾脏中诱导良性肿瘤。对灌胃研究进行了相当详细的评估。该评估表明,所有肾小管腺瘤及所有肾小管非典型增生病例均发生在严重或终末期慢性进行性肾病区域,且肿瘤并非局限于肾脏的任何特定部位。对苯二酚的致癌作用模式可能是加剧这种自然疾病进程。对苯二酚在体外和体内均具有致突变性,可在啮齿动物骨髓细胞中引起遗传毒性或染色体畸变。至少部分(如果不是全部)染色体效应是由对苯二酚或其代谢产物干扰染色体分离所致,可能是由于与有丝分裂纺锤体蛋白相互作用。然而,几乎所有体内研究中用于证明这些效应的给药途径是腹腔注射或皮下注射,这些途径被认为不合适。有五项经口途径研究。其中包括一项小鼠骨髓细胞微核试验,单次经口给予80毫克/千克体重后获得微弱的、边缘阳性反应。其余经口途径研究均未显示显著效应。这些研究包括一项小鼠骨髓细胞微核试验,暴露于含0.8%对苯二酚的饮食6天后未发现遗传毒性活性;两项(32)P后标记试验,一项以Sprague - Dawley大鼠的耳下腺、肝脏和脾脏为靶标,另一项以F344大鼠的肾脏为靶标;最后一项经口试验检测F344大鼠肾脏DNA中的8 - 羟基脱氧鸟苷加合物。因此,体内任何遗传毒性效应的证据(以及数据库)都很稀少,且在肾脏中未观察到此类效应。虽然谷胱甘肽结合物可能是肿瘤诱导的原因,但仔细的组织学检查似乎表明,所测试的几种谷胱甘肽化合物中最具活性毒性的2,3,5 - 三谷胱甘肽 - S - 基对苯二酚靶向肾脏一个非常特定的区域,即外髓质的外带(OSOM),而与对苯二酚相关的腺瘤分布更随机,发生在皮质以及髓质。本文提出并评估了一种非遗传毒性作用模式,即加剧自发发生的啮齿动物肾脏疾病——慢性进行性肾病(CPN)。这种疾病在雄性大鼠中尤为突出,且证据表明不存在与之对应的人类疾病;因此,给予对苯二酚的雄性大鼠肾小管腺瘤发生率增加对人类没有影响。