Perspectives and progress in development of breast cancer chemopreventive drugs.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Antineoplastic Agents↗
Biomedical subjects
C C Sigman
Publications and source records attributed to C C Sigman.
Progress in clinical chemoprevention.
Chemoprevention has four goals: (1) inhibition of carcinogens, (2) logical intervention for persons at genetic risk for cancer, (3) treatment of precancerous lesions, and (4) confirmation and translation of leads from dietary epidemiology into intervention strategies. The National Cancer Institute has described a multidisciplinary, cancer science-based program for chemopreventive drug development that addresses these objectives, and has collaborated with the US Food and Drug Administration to provide consensus guidance for applying this approach. A critical component is the identification and characterization of intermediate biomarkers of cancer and their validation as surrogate end points for cancer incidence in clinical chemoprevention trials. More than 40 agents in the program are currently on the clinical development path (preclinical toxicology and phase I clinical safety studies or phase II/III efficacy trials), with the major effort in phase II studies to identify and characterize intermediate biomarkers. The continually advancing knowledge of molecular and tissue-based carcinogenesis mechanisms will provide leads to new chemopreventive agents with increased specificity for carcinogenesis-related activities and, hence, reduced toxicity by virtue of minimal effects on normal cell and tissue functions. Results from the Human Genome Project will help identify and evaluate the potential for chemopreventive intervention in cohorts at genetic risk and will provide specific target lesions for intervention strategies.
Anticarcinogenic Agents↗
New agents for cancer chemoprevention.
Clinical chemoprevention trials of more than 30 agents and agent combinations are now in progress or being planned. The most advanced agents are well known and are in large Phase III chemoprevention intervention trials or epidemiological studies. These drugs include several retinoids [e.g., retinol, retinyl palmitate, all-trans-retinoic acid, and 13-cis-retinoic acid], calcium, Beta carotene, vitamin E, tamoxifen, and finasteride. Other newer agents are currently being evaluated in or being considered for Phase II and early Phase III chemoprevention trials. Prominent in this group are all-trans-N-(4-hydroxy phenyl)retinamide (4-HPR) (alone and in combination with tamoxifen), 2-difluoromethylornithine (DFMO), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (aspirin, piroxicam, sulindac), oltipraz, and dehydroepiandrostenedione (DHEA). A third group is new agents showing chemopreventive activity in animal models, epidemiological studies, or in pilot clinical intervention studies. They are now in preclinical toxicology testing or Phase I safety and pharmacokinetics trials preparatory to chemoprevention efficacy trials. These agents include S-allyl-l-cysteine, curcumin, DHEA analog 8354 (fluasterone), genistein, ibuprofen, indole-3-carbinol, perillyl alcohol, phenethyl isothiocyanate, 9-cis-retinoic acid, sulindac sulfone, tea extracts, ursodiol, vitamin D analogs, and p-xylyl selenocyanate. A new generation of agents and agent combinations will soon enter clinical chemoprevention studies based primarily on promising chemopreventive activity in animal models and in mechanistic studies. Among these agents are more efficacious analogs of known chemopreventive drugs including novel carotenoids (e.g., alpha-carotene and lutein). Also included are safer analogs which retain the chemopreventive efficacy of the parent drug such as vitamin D3 analogs. Other agents of high interest are aromatase inhibitors (e.g., (+)-vorozole), and protease inhibitors (e.g., Bowman-Birk soybean trypsin inhibitor). Combinations are also being considered, such as vitamin E with l-selenomethionine. Analysis of signal transduction pathways is beginning to yield classes of potentially active and selective chemopreventive drugs. Examples are ras isoprenylation and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors.
Animals↗
Use of in vitro assays to predict the efficacy of chemopreventive agents in whole animals.
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.
Animals↗
Strategy and planning for chemopreventive drug development: clinical development plans II.
This is the second publication of Clinical Development Plans from the National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Chemoprevention Branch and Agent Development Committee. The Clinical Development Plans summarize the status of promising chemopreventive agents regarding evidence for safety and chemopreventive efficacy in preclinical and clinical studies. They also contain the strategy for further development of these drugs, addressing pharmacodynamics, drug effect measurements, intermediate biomarkers for monitoring efficacy, toxicity, supply and formulation, regulatory approval, and proposed clinical trials. Sixteen new Clinical Development Plans are presented here: curcumin, dehydroepiandrosterone, folic acid, genistein, indole-3-carbinol, perillyl alcohol, phenethyl isothiocyanate, 9-cis-retinoic acid, 13-cis-retinoic acid, l-selenomethionine and 1, 4-phenylenebis(methylene)selenocyanate, sulindac sulfone, tea, ursodiol, vitamin A, and (+)-vorozole. The objective of publishing these plans is to stimulate interest and thinking among the scientific community on the prospects for developing these and future generations of chemopreventive drugs.
Animals↗
Perspectives on chemoprevention agent selection and short-term clinical prevention trials.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Anticarcinogenic Agents↗
Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors as potential cancer chemopreventives.
Among the most important targets for chemopreventive intervention and drug development are deregulated signal transduction pathways, and protein tyrosine kinases are key components of these pathways. Loss of tyrosine kinase regulatory mechanisms has been implicated in neoplastic growth; indeed, many oncogenes code for either receptor or cellular tyrosine kinases. Because of its deregulation in many cancers (bladder, breast, cervix, colon, esophagus, head and neck, lung, and prostate), the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been selected as a potential target for chemoprevention. Because growth factor networks are redundant, selective inhibition of signaling pathways activated in precancerous and cancerous cells should be possible. Requirements for specific EGFR inhibitors include specificity for EGFR, high potency, activity in intact cells, and activity in vivo. Inhibition of autophosphorylation is preferred, because it should result in total blockade of the signaling pathway. Inhibitors that compete with substrate rather than at the ATP-binding site are also preferable, because they are not as likely to inhibit other ATP-using cellular enzymes. Several classes of specific EGFR inhibitors have been synthesized recently, including structures such as benzylidene malononitriles, dianilinophthalimides, quinazolines, pyrimidines, [(alkylamino)methyl]-acrylophenones, enollactones, dihydroxybenzylaminosalicylates, 2-thioindoles, aminoflavones, and tyrosine analogue-containing peptides. A possible testing strategy for the development of these and other EGFR inhibitors as chemopreventive agents includes the following steps: (a) determine EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitory activity in vitro; (b) evaluate EGFR specificity and selectivity (relative to other tyrosine kinases and other protein kinases); (c) determine inhibition of EGFR-mediated effects in intact cells; (d) determine inhibition of EGFR-mediated effects in vivo (e.g., in nude mouse tumor xenografts); and (e) determine chemopreventive efficacy in vivo (e.g., in the hamster buccal pouch or mouse or rat bladder).
Animals↗
Mechanistic considerations in the evaluation of chemopreventive data.
Possible chemopreventive mechanisms include carcinogen-blocking activities, antioxidant/anti-inflammatory activities and antiproliferation/antiprogression activities. Carcinogen-blocking activities encompass inhibition of carcinogen uptake, inhibition of carcinogen formation or activation, deactivation or detoxification of carcinogens, prevention of carcinogen binding to DNA, and enhancement of the level or fidelity of DNA repair. Antioxidant/anti-inflammatory activities include scavenging of reactive electrophiles and oxygen radicals, and inhibition of arachidonic acid metabolism. Antiproliferation/antiprogression activities comprise modulation of signal transduction, modulation of hormonal and growth factor activity, inhibition of aberrant oncogene activity, inhibition of polyamine metabolism, induction of terminal differentiation, restoration of immune responses, enhancement of intercellular communication, restoration of tumour suppressor function, induction of apoptosis, telomerase inhibition, correction of DNA methylation imbalances, inhibition of angiogenesis, inhibition of basement membrane degradation, and activation of antimetastasis genes. In evaluating the potential efficacy of chemopreventive agents several mechanistic parameters are weighed: (1) the number of chemoprevention-related pharmacological activities, (2) the impact of the agent on likely carcinogenesis pathways to the targeted cancer, (3) pharmacodynamics, and (4) specificity for chemopreventive activity compared with interference with normal cellular function. Mechanistic data are important throughout the development process for chemopreventive drugs, and they are particularly important in the earlier phases of identifying promising candidate agents and characterizing efficacy. In vitro mechanistic assays are a first step in evaluating chemopreventive potential. Mechanistic considerations are also useful in defining animal efficacy models and in interpreting the results of assays in these models. Mechanistic data are also applied in designing short-term Phase II clinical chemoprevention trials that use reductions in intermediate biomarkers of cancer rather than cancer incidence as end points. The basis for identifying and evaluating these biomarkers is in understanding carcinogenesis and chemopreventive mechanisms.
Anticarcinogenic Agents↗
Risk biomarkers and current strategies for cancer chemoprevention.
Quantifiable, well-characterized cancer risk factors demonstrate the need for chemoprevention and define cohorts for chemopreventive intervention. For chemoprevention, the important cancer risk factors are those that can be measured quantitatively in the subject at risk. These factors, called risk biomarkers, can be used to identify cohorts for chemoprevention. Those modulated by chemopreventive agents may also be used as endpoints in chemoprevention studies. Generally, the risk biomarkers fit into categories based on those previously defined by Hulka: 1) carcinogen exposure, 2) carcinogen exposure/effect, 3) genetic predisposition, 4) intermediate biomarkers of cancer, and 5) previous cancers. Besides their use in characterizing cohorts for chemoprevention trials, some risk biomarkers can be modulated by chemopreventive agents. These biomarkers may be suitable surrogate endpoints for cancer incidence in chemoprevention intervention trials. The criteria for risk biomarkers defining cohorts and serving as endpoints are the same, except that those defining cohorts are not necessarily modulated by chemopreventive agents. A primary criterion is that the biomarkers fit expected biological mechanisms of early carcinogenesis-i.e., differential expression in normal and high-risk tissue, on or closely linked to the causal pathway for the cancer, and short latency compared with cancer. They must occur in sufficient number to allow their biological and statistical evaluation. Further, the biomarkers should be assayed reliably and quantitatively, measured easily, and correlated to cancer incidence. Particularly important for cancer risk screening in normal subjects is the ability to use noninvasive techniques that are highly specific, sensitive, and quantitative. Since carcinogenesis is a multipath process, single biomarkers are difficult to correlate to cancer, as they may appear on only one or a few of the many possible causal pathways. As shown in colorectal carcinogenesis, the risks associated with the presence of biomarkers may be additive or synergistic. That is, the accumulation of genetic lesions is the more important determinant of colorectal cancer compared with the presence of any single lesion. Thus, batteries of biomarker abnormalities, particularly those representing the range of carcinogenesis pathways, may prove more useful than single biomarkers both in characterizing cohorts at risk and defining modulatable risks. Risk biomarkers are already being integrated into many chemoprevention intervention trials. One example is the phase II trial of oltipraz inhibition of carcinogen-DNA adducts in a Chinese population exposed to aflatoxin B1. Also, urine samples from subjects in this trial will be screened for the effect of oltipraz on urinary mutagens. A second example is a chemoprevention protocol developed for patients at high risk for breast cancer; the cohort is defined both by hereditary risk and the presence of biomarker abnormalities. Modulation of the biomarker abnormalities is a proposed endpoint. Also, dysplastic lesions, such as prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, oral leukoplakia and colorectal adenomas, have been used to define high-risk cohorts and as potential modulatable surrogate endpoints in chemoprevention trials.
Animals↗
Strategies for phase II cancer chemoprevention trials: cervix, endometrium, and ovary.
Well-designed and conducted Phase II clinical trials are very important to cancer chemoprevention drug development. Three critical aspects govern the design and conduct of these trials--well-characterized agents, suitable cohorts, and reliable biomarkers for measuring efficacy that can serve as surrogate endpoints for cancer incidence. Requirements for the agent are experimental or epidemiological data showing chemopreventive efficacy, safety on chronic administration, and a mechanistic rationale for the chemopreventive activity observed. Agents that meet these criteria for chemoprevention of cervical cancer include antiproliferative drugs (e.g., 2-difluoromethylornithine), retinoids, folic acid, antioxidant vitamins and other agents that prevent cellular oxidative damage. Because of the significant cervical cancer risk associated with human papilloma virus (HPV) infection, agents that interfere with the activity of HPV products may also prove to be effective chemopreventives. In endometrium, unopposed estrogen exposure has been associated with cancer incidence. Thus, pure antiestrogens and progestins may be chemopreventive in this tissue. Ovarian cancer risk is correlated to ovulation frequency; therefore, oral contraceptives are potentially chemopreventive in the ovary. Recent clinical observations also suggest that retinoids, particularly all-trans-N-4-hydroxyphenylretinamide, may be chemopreventive in this tissue. The cohort should be suitable for measuring the chemopreventive activity of the agent and the intermediate biomarkers chosen. In the cervix, patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and in endometrium, patients with atypical hyperplasia, fit these criteria. Defining a cohort for a Phase II trial in the ovary is more difficult. This tissue is less accessible for biopsy; consequently, the presence of precancerous lesions is more difficult to confirm. The criteria for biomarkers are that they fit expected biological mechanisms (i.e., differential expression in normal and high-risk tissue, on or closely linked to the causal pathway for the cancer, modulated by chemopreventive agents, and short latency compared with cancer), may be assayed reliably and quantitatively, measured easily, and correlate to decrease cancer incidence. They must occur in sufficient incidence to allow their biological and statistical evaluation relevant to cancer. Since carcinogenesis is a multipath process, single biomarkers are difficult to validate as surrogate endpoints, perhaps appearing on only one or a few of the many possible causal pathways. Panels of biomarkers, particularly those representing the range of carcinogenesis pathways, may prove more useful as surrogate endpoints. It is important to avoid solely on biomarkers that do not describe cancer but represent isolated events that may or may not be on the causal pathway or otherwise associated with carcinogenesis. These include markers of normal cellular processes that may be increased or expressed during carcinogenesis. Chemoprevention trials should be designed to evaluate fully the two or three biomarkers that appear to be the best models of the cancer. Additional biomarkers should be considered only if they can be analyzed efficiently and the sample size allows more important biomarkers to be evaluated completely. Two types of biomarkers that stand out regarding their high correlation to cancer and their ability to be quantified are measures of intraepithelial neoplasia and indicators of cellular proliferation. Measurements made by computer-assisted image analysis that are potentially useful as surrogate endpoint biomarkers include nuclear polymorphism comprising nuclear size, shape (roundness), and texture (DNA distribution patterns); nucleolar size and number of nucleoli/nuclei; DNA ploidy, and proliferation biomarkers such as S-phase fraction and PCNA...
Anticarcinogenic Agents↗
Cancer chemoprevention agent development strategies for genistein.
Cancer chemoprevention refers to the reduction of cancer incidence by administration of agents or drugs that inhibit, reverse or retard the cancer process. Genistein has demonstrated a wide variety of biological activities that make it a good candidate for a chemopreventive agent. Many agents, such as genistein, are currently being tested with the goal of developing safe and effective chemopreventive drugs for human use. Genistein was investigated as a potential chemopreventive agent in an azoxymethane-induced colon carcinogenesis model. Genistein was tested for its ability to inhibit aberrant colon crypts in the colon of F344 rats that had been treated with azoxymethane. Genistein was administered in the diet from 1 wk before the carcinogen to 4 wk after the first carcinogen dose for a total of 5 wk. At both doses, 75 and 150 mg/kg, the mean number of foci per colon was significantly reduced. Further development of this agent includes demonstration of the preventive efficacy in an in vivo tumorigenesis model, followed by preclinical pharmacology and toxicology testing. Phase 1, 2 and 3 clinical chemoprevention trials would be then performed to determine pharmacokinetics, safe doses, and effectiveness for New Drug Approval.
Animals↗
Progress in cancer chemoprevention: perspectives on agent selection and short-term clinical intervention trials.
The basic cancer-related chemical and biological sciences, pathology, and epidemiology have contributed to the understanding that antimutagenesis and antiproliferation are the important general mechanisms of chemoprevention and to the development of antimutagenic and anti-proliferative agents as potential chemopreventive drugs. These disciplines have also provided the biochemical and histopathological bases for identifying intermediate biomarkers that can be used as surrogate end points for cancer incidence in clinical chemoprevention trials and for selecting cohorts for these trials. Particularly important as histological biomarkers of cancer are the cytonuclear morphological and densitometric changes that define intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN). IEN changes are on the causal pathway to cancer. They may serve as target lesions in Phase II chemoprevention trials and as standards against which other earlier cellular and molecular biomarkers can be evaluated. Strategies for the clinical evaluation of chemopreventive agents have been defined for seven targets--colorectal, prostate, lung, breast, bladder, oral, and cervical cancers. Cohorts have been identified for short-term Phase II trials that investigate the effects of chemopreventive agents on IEN and on earlier biomarkers. Patients with adenomas serve as a cohort for trials in colon. One cohort for Phase II trials in prostate is patients with early stage cancers scheduled for prostatectomy; another is patients with prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (without prostatic carcinoma). Patients treated for lung cancer are at high risk for bronchial dysplasia and second cancers; such patients are a cohort for Phase II trials in lung cancer. Presurgical breast cancer patients and patients with ductal or lobular carcinoma in situ are cohorts for studies in breast. Patients with superficial bladder cancers (Ta/T1 with or without carcinoma in situ) are cohorts for studies of chemoprevention in bladder, and patients with dysplastic oral leukoplakia are evaluated for chemoprevention of oral cancers. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia is a prototype IEN, and patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia are a cohort for studies of cervical cancer.
Adenoma↗
Mechanistic considerations in chemopreventive drug development.
This overview of the potential mechanisms of chemopreventive activity will provide the conceptual groundwork for chemopreventive drug discovery, leading to structure-activity and mechanistic studies that identify and evaluate new agents. Possible mechanisms of chemopreventive activity with examples of promising agents include carcinogen blocking activities such as inhibition of carcinogen uptake (calcium), inhibition of formation or activation of carcinogen (arylalkyl isothiocyanates, DHEA, NSAIDs, polyphenols), deactivation or detoxification of carcinogen (oltipraz, other GSH-enhancing agents), preventing carcinogen binding to DNA (oltipraz, polyphenols), and enhancing the level or fidelity of DNA repair (NAC, protease inhibitors). Chemopreventive antioxidant activities include scavenging reactive electrophiles (GSH-enhancing agents), scavenging oxygen radicals (polyphenols, vitamin E), and inhibiting arachidonic acid metabolism (glycyrrhetinic acid, NAC, NSAIDs, polyphenols, tamoxifen). Antiproliferation/antiprogression activities include modulation of signal transduction (glycyrrhetinic acid, NSAIDs, polyphenols, retinoids, tamoxifen), modulation of hormonal and growth factor activity (NSAIDs, retinoids, tamoxifen), inhibition of aberrant oncogene activity (genistein, NSAIDs, monoterpenes), inhibition of polyamine metabolism (DFMO, retinoids, tamoxifen), induction of terminal differentiation (calcium, retinoids, vitamin D3), restoration of immune response (NSAIDs, selenium, vitamin E), enhancing intercellular communication (carotenoids, retinoids), restoration of tumor suppressor function, induction of programmed cell death (apoptosis) (butyric acid, genistein, retinoids, tamoxifen), correction of DNA methylation imbalances (folic acid), inhibition of angiogenesis (genistein, retinoids, tamoxifen), inhibition of basement membrane degradation (protease inhibitors), and activation of antimetastasis genes. A systematic drug development program for chemopreventive agents is only possible with continuing research into mechanisms of action and thoughtful application of the mechanisms to new drug design and discovery. One approach is to construct pharmacological activity profiles for promising agents. These profiles are compared among the promising agents and with untested compounds to identify similarities. Classical structure-activity studies are used to find optimal agents (high efficacy with low toxicity) based on good lead agents. Studies evaluating tissue-specific and pharmacokinetic parameters are very important. A final approach is design of mechanism-based assays and identification of mechanism-based intermediate biomarkers for evaluation of chemopreventive efficacy.
Animals↗
Chemoprevention of OH-BBN-induced bladder cancer in mice by piroxicam.
Piroxicam inhibited induction of transitional cell carcinoma in mouse urinary bladder by N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)-nitrosamine. At 15 mg piroxicam/kg diet, tumor incidence was reduced 82% (P < 0.0001) compared with carcinogen controls. At 30 mg piroxicam/kg diet, tumor incidence was reduced 70% (P < 0.001). Results at the higher dose level suggested that piroxicam also may have inhibited invasion slightly. Combination treatment with 2-difluoromethyl-ornithine (DFMO) or all-trans-N-(4-hydroxyphenyl)retinamide (4-HPR) or both agents did not improve the chemopreventive potential of piroxicam. However, the three-agent combination of 30 mg piroxicam/kg, 1200 mg DFMO/kg and 313 mg 4-HPR/kg diet was highly effective. Tumor incidence was reduced 91% (P < 0.0001) compared with carcinogen controls. Unfortunately, the high efficacy was somewhat compromised by a significant decrease in survival and body weight gain in mice receiving the combination of agents compared with the carcinogen control.
Animals↗
Progress in applied chemoprevention research.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Animals↗
A systematic search for structure-activity relationships of skin sensitizers. II. Para-phenylenediamines.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Allergens↗
A systematic search for structure-activity relationships of skin contact sensitizers: methodology.
A computerized resource for the systematic evaluation of the structure-activity relationships and other aspects of contact allergens is described. This resource consists of a data base of results of contact dermatitis tests and a structural classification scheme for contact allergens that is called a Structure-Activity (S/A) Tree. The data base now contains approximately 2200 test results extracted from the journal Contact Dermatitis (1975-1982) and is continually being expanded. The S/A Tree is being developed to provide an index to structure-activity relationships of contact allergens; 63 structural groups are currently indexed. Analyses of benzoquinones and gallic acid esters are presented as examples of the potential application of this resource to such problems as the identification of potential cross-reactants, appropriate test concentrations and vehicles, and the reliability of available test results.
Animals↗
Inhibition of cyclic AMP phosphodiesterases by cyclic nucleotide analogs and nitrogen heterocycles.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
3',5'-Cyclic-AMP Phosphodiesterases↗