Steele V E, Sharma S, Mehta R, Elmore E, Redpath L, Rudd C, Bagheri D, Sigman C C, Kelloff G J
Chemoprevention Branch, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
J Cell Biochem Suppl. 1996;26:29-53. doi: 10.1002/jcb.240630704.
Five in vitro assays have been applied to screen the efficacy of potential chemopreventive agents. These assays measure a) inhibition of morphological transformation in rat tracheal epithelial (RTE) cells, b) inhibition of anchorage independence in human lung tumor (A427) cells, c) inhibition of hyperplastic alveolar nodule formation in mouse mammary organ cultures (MMOC), d) inhibition of anchorage independence in mouse JB6 epidermal cells, and e) the inhibition of calcium tolerance in human foreskin epithelial cells. The efficacy of many of these same agents in whole animal studies of lung, colon, mammary gland, skin, and urinary bladder carcinogenesis has also been measured. The aim herein is to estimate the positive and negative predictive values of these in vitro assays against whole animal chemopreventive efficacy data using the same chemicals. For three of these assays--using RTE, A427 cells and mouse mammary organ culture (MMOC)-enough data are available to allow the estimate to be made. Such extrapolations of in vitro data to the in vivo situation are difficult at best. There are many dissimilarities between the two assay systems. The in vitro assays use respiratory and mammary epithelial cells, while the in vivo assays use respiratory, mammary, colon, bladder and skin cells. The in vitro assays use the carcinogens benzo(a)pyrene (B(a)P) and 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene (DMBA), while the in vivo assays use B(a)P, DMBA, N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU), N,N'-diethylnitrosamine (DEN), azoxymethane (AOM), and N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)nitrosoamine (OH-BBN). There are vast differences in pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics in vitro and in vivo, yet it is possible to rapidly screen chemicals in vitro for efficacy at one-tenth the cost and complete tests in weeks instead of months. A positive in vitro assay was defined as a 20% inhibition (compared with control) for the RTE and A427 assays and a 60% inhibition for the MMOC assay at nontoxic concentrations. For in vivo assays, the criterion for a positive result was a statistically significant inhibition of incidence, multiplicity or a significant increase in latency (mean time to first tumor). For an agent to be considered negative in animals, it required negative results in at least two different organ systems and no positive results. Using the battery of three in vitro tests, the positive predictive value for having one, two, or three positive in vitro assays and at least one positive whole animal test was 76%, 80%, and 83% respectively. The negative predictive values for one, two or all three in vitro assays was 25%, 27%, and 50%. From these data it is observed that in vitro assays give valuable positive predictive values and less valuable negative predictive values. The mechanisms of chemoprevention are not well understood. Seven categories of agents were examined for their cancer preventing both in vitro and in vivo: antiinflammatories, antioxidants, arachadonic acid metabolism inhibitors, GSH inducers, GST inducers, ODC inhibitors, and PKC inhibitors. Three or even five in vitro assays cannot be all-inclusive of the many mechanisms of cancer prevention. However, three assays help to predict whole animal efficacy with reasonable positive predictive values. Much work and development remains to be done to rapidly identify new chemopreventive drugs.
已应用五种体外试验来筛选潜在化学预防剂的功效。这些试验测量:a)大鼠气管上皮(RTE)细胞形态转化的抑制;b)人肺肿瘤(A427)细胞锚定非依赖性的抑制;c)小鼠乳腺器官培养物(MMOC)中增生性肺泡结节形成的抑制;d)小鼠JB6表皮细胞锚定非依赖性的抑制;以及e)人包皮上皮细胞钙耐受性的抑制。还测量了许多相同试剂在肺、结肠、乳腺、皮肤和膀胱癌发生的全动物研究中的功效。本文的目的是使用相同的化学物质,估计这些体外试验针对全动物化学预防功效数据的阳性和阴性预测值。对于其中三种试验——使用RTE、A427细胞和小鼠乳腺器官培养(MMOC)——有足够的数据来进行估计。将体外数据外推至体内情况充其量是困难的。这两种试验系统之间存在许多差异。体外试验使用呼吸道和乳腺上皮细胞,而体内试验使用呼吸道、乳腺、结肠、膀胱和皮肤细胞。体外试验使用致癌物苯并(a)芘(B(a)P)和7,12 - 二甲基苯并(a)蒽(DMBA),而体内试验使用B(a)P、DMBA、N - 甲基 - N - 亚硝基脲(MNU)、N,N'-二乙基亚硝胺(DEN)、偶氮甲烷(AOM)和N - 丁基 - N - (4 - 羟基丁基)亚硝胺(OH - BBN)。体外和体内的药效学和药代动力学存在巨大差异,但有可能以十分之一的成本在体外快速筛选化学物质的功效,并在数周而非数月内完成试验。体外试验阳性定义为在无毒浓度下,RTE和A427试验的抑制率为20%(与对照相比),MMOC试验的抑制率为60%。对于体内试验,阳性结果的标准是发病率、肿瘤数量有统计学显著抑制或潜伏期(首个肿瘤出现的平均时间)显著延长。一种试剂在动物试验中被视为阴性,需要在至少两个不同器官系统中得到阴性结果且无阳性结果。使用这三种体外试验组合,体外试验有一、二或三个阳性且至少有一个全动物试验阳性的阳性预测值分别为76%、80%和83%。体外试验有一、二或全部三个阴性的阴性预测值分别为25%、27%和50%。从这些数据可以看出,体外试验给出了有价值的阳性预测值和价值较低的阴性预测值。化学预防的机制尚未完全了解。研究了七类试剂在体外和体内的防癌作用:抗炎药、抗氧化剂、花生四烯酸代谢抑制剂、谷胱甘肽诱导剂、谷胱甘肽 - S - 转移酶诱导剂、鸟氨酸脱羧酶抑制剂和蛋白激酶C抑制剂。三种甚至五种体外试验并不能涵盖癌症预防的众多机制。然而,三种试验有助于以合理的阳性预测值预测全动物的功效。要快速鉴定新的化学预防药物,仍有许多工作和研发有待开展。