Barrett J C
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 Sep;78(9):5685-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.78.9.5685.
2-Aminopurine, a classical mutagen in prokaryotic systems, is inactive as a carcinogen in two animal species. To determine the basis for this discrepancy in the correlation between carcinogenesis and mutagenesis, the ability of 2-aminopurine to induce somatic mutation and neoplastic transformation concomitantly in the same cellular system was examined. 6-N-hydroxylaminopurine, a related modified purine that is a mutagen and a carcinogen, was also studied. 2-Aminopurine was a mutagen in Syrian hamster embryo cells, but its activity was very weak. The maximum induced mutation frequency with either of two mutational markers was only 7 X 10(-6) mutants per surviving cell. 2-Aminopurine also induced morphological transformation of the cells under the same conditions, but the frequency was only approximately 0.04% per surviving colony. Neoplastic transformation of the cells after 2-aminopurine treatment was not observed in these experiments. These results indicate that 2-aminopurine is, at best, a weak transforming agent. The lack of carcinogenic activity in vivo with 2-aminopurine is consistent with these observations. In contrast to the results with 2-aminopurine, 6-N-hydroxylaminopurine was a very effective mutagen in these cells (up to 10(-3) mutants per survivor) and induced morphological transformation of the cells in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, neoplastic transformation was induced by this nucleic acid base analog. The correlation of mutagenic activity with transforming ability of these two modified purines supports a relationship between mutagenesis and carcinogenesis. However, relative to other carcinogens, there is a quantitative difference in the ability of 6-N-hydroxylaminopurine to induce cell transformation and mutation. For example, in benzo[a]pyrene-treated cultures, the ratio of the frequency of induced morphological transformation to that of somatic mutation was approximately 100, whereas for 6-N-hydroxylaminopurine-treated cultures, the ratio of transformation to mutation was only 3-12.5. This indicates that 6-N-hydroxylaminopurine is less potent than benzo[a]pyrene in inducing transformation when compared at equal mutagenic potency. This is consistent with our hypothesis that cell transformation, and possibly cancer, occurs predominantly as the result of a mutation at the chromosome level rather than a gene mutation.
2-氨基嘌呤是原核生物系统中的一种经典诱变剂,但在两种动物物种中作为致癌物却无活性。为了确定致癌作用与诱变作用之间这种差异的基础,研究了2-氨基嘌呤在同一细胞系统中同时诱导体细胞突变和肿瘤转化的能力。还研究了6-N-羟基氨基嘌呤,一种相关的修饰嘌呤,它既是诱变剂又是致癌物。2-氨基嘌呤在叙利亚仓鼠胚胎细胞中是一种诱变剂,但其活性非常弱。两种突变标记物中任何一种的最大诱导突变频率仅为每存活细胞7×10(-6)个突变体。2-氨基嘌呤在相同条件下也诱导了细胞的形态转化,但其频率仅约为每存活集落0.04%。在这些实验中未观察到2-氨基嘌呤处理后细胞的肿瘤转化。这些结果表明,2-氨基嘌呤充其量只是一种弱转化剂。2-氨基嘌呤在体内缺乏致癌活性与这些观察结果一致。与2-氨基嘌呤的结果相反,6-N-羟基氨基嘌呤在这些细胞中是一种非常有效的诱变剂(每存活细胞高达10(-3)个突变体),并以剂量依赖的方式诱导细胞的形态转化。此外,这种核酸碱基类似物诱导了肿瘤转化。这两种修饰嘌呤的诱变活性与转化能力之间的相关性支持了诱变作用与致癌作用之间的关系。然而,相对于其他致癌物,6-N-羟基氨基嘌呤诱导细胞转化和突变的能力存在数量差异。例如,在苯并[a]芘处理的培养物中,诱导形态转化频率与体细胞突变频率的比值约为100,而对于6-N-羟基氨基嘌呤处理的培养物,转化与突变的比值仅为3-12.5。这表明,在同等诱变效力下比较时,6-N-羟基氨基嘌呤在诱导转化方面比苯并[a]芘效力低。这与我们的假设一致,即细胞转化以及可能的癌症主要是染色体水平突变而非基因突变的结果。