This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bruwer, A. Articles by Leddy, E. T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bruwer, A. Articles by Leddy, E. T.

Experimental Inhibition of Carcinoma by Lymphosarcoma^*

André Bruwer, Thomas C. Donald, Jr., George M. Higgins, John R. McDonald and Eugene T. Leddy

( Mayo Foundation, University of Minnesota, and Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.)

A study has been made of the effects obtained in experimental animals when suspensions of lymphosarcomatous cells and carcinomatous cells are implanted, separately and in mixtures.

The results showed that, of 22 rats implanted with lymphosarcoma, tumors grew rapidly in 21 animals for a certain period of time and then regressed. All tumors grew rapidly in the 22 animals which received implants of the carcinoma. When cell suspensions were implanted in separate sites on the same animal, the resulting tumors followed growth patterns which were more or less like those obtained when implantations were made into separate animals. When mixed suspensions of the two tumors were implanted, however, tumor growth patterns suggesting certain inhibitory relationships were seen. A period of rapid growth, a period of regression, and a subsequent period of growth were observed. Sections of the tumor obtained during the initial growth showed that the tissue was predominantly lymphosarcomatous, whereas sections obtained during the second period of rapid growth showed that the tissue was then predominantly carcinomatous.

Our study would seem to support the opinion that lymphosarcoma and carcinoma, when growing independently in separate locations in the same animal, display no antagonistic growth patterns. However, when lymphosarcoma cells and carcinoma cells are implanted together and subjected to identical environmental factors provided by the host, there appears to be a preferential development of the lymphosarcoma. Significant growth of the carcinoma cells did not take place until growth and regression of the lymphosarcoma had occurred. Possible explanations for this sequential development are offered.

^* With the technical assistance of Mary J. Woods.

Fellow in Radiology.

Fellow in Medicine.

Received 8/ 1/51.