This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend 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 Cheng, M. Articles by Conner, M. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cheng, M. Articles by Conner, M. K.

Comparison of Sister Chromatid Exchange Induction and Known Carcinogenic Activities of Vinyl and Allyl Carbamates¹

Departments of Industrial Environmental Health Sciences [M. K. C.] and Biostatistics [M. C., M. K. C.], Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261

In vivo sister chromatid exchange (SCE) induction by vinyl and allyl carbamates was examined in alveolar macrophage, bone marrow, and regenerating liver cells of C57BL/6J x DBA/2J F₁ mice. Allyl carbamate was effective in producing increases in SCE frequencies (relative to base-line SCE) over a dose range of 220 µmol/kg (approximately 2 times base line) to 2.2 mmol/kg (3 times base line). In general, alveolar macrophage and regenerating liver cells had higher responses, although not significantly, than did bone marrow.

Vinyl carbamate produced significant increases in SCE frequencies over a dose range of 10 µmol/kg (2 times base line) to 75 µmol/kg (8 to 10 times base line). At the highest dose, SCE frequencies in extrahepatic tissues of hepatectomized mice were significantly higher than in intact mice and, within hepatectomized mice, alveolar macrophage and regenerating liver cell responses were greater than were bone marrow responses. Vinyl carbamate was approximately 30 times as potent a SCE inducer than we reported previously for ethyl carbamate. To date, our studies of six different carbamate esters have indicated a striking similarity in relative potencies for SCE induction and their known tumorigenic potencies.

¹ This work was supported by the Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection Agency (CR 806-815-01-2/670/10/07); the University of Pittsburgh Research Development Fund; and the Mobil Foundation.

² To whom requests for reprints should be addressed.

Received 12/ 9/81. Accepted 2/25/82.