Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Mol Carcinog ; 39(4): 195-8, 2004 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15057871

ABSTRACT

To characterize further the role of the INK4a-ARF locus in the multistep process of skin carcinogenesis, we performed a mutational analysis of this locus in skin lesions from hairless mice either irradiated with UVB alone or with a solar simulator delivering UVA + B. INK4a-ARF mutations were present in five of 57 squamous cell carcinomas (9%), but no mutation was detected in precancerous lesions. All mutations were C:G > T:A transitions located at dipyrimidic sites, the hallmark of UVB mutagenesis. Three mutations affected only the p19(ARF) reading frame, whereas two mutations affected only the p16(INK4a) transcript. This study demonstrates for the first time UV-induced mutations of INK4a-ARF that occur in a small percentage in late stages skin tumors.


Subject(s)
Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16/genetics , Mutation , Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced/genetics , Skin Neoplasms/genetics , Tumor Suppressor Protein p14ARF/genetics , Ultraviolet Rays/adverse effects , Animals , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/etiology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/genetics , DNA Damage/radiation effects , Genes, p16 , Mice , Mice, Hairless , Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced/etiology , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Polymorphism, Single-Stranded Conformational , Precancerous Conditions/etiology , Precancerous Conditions/genetics , Pyrimidines/metabolism , Skin Neoplasms/etiology , Tumor Suppressor Protein p53/genetics
2.
Exp Dermatol ; 12(2): 153-9, 2003 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12702143

ABSTRACT

Sunscreens have been designed to protect against sunburn and their efficacy has, therefore, been labeled by the so-called sun protection factor (SPF). Although this value is well determined using a standardized protocol and it affords a good evaluation of the protection against erythema it may be inadequate to provide a relevant measurement of efficacy against other biologic damages. This is particularly true when action spectra and threshold dose are different from those of erythema. In the case of ultraviolet (UV)-induced immune suppression, the action spectrum is not known, so it cannot be asserted that SPF may accurately predict the level of protection against this endpoint. We addressed this issue by measuring in human volunteers the ability of two broad-spectrum SPF 15 sunscreens with different ultraviolet A (UVA) protection levels, to prevent the alteration of the efferent phase of the local delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) response to recall antigens (Multitest Pasteur/Mérieux, Lyon, France) after acute solar-simulated UV exposure. We first determined the ultraviolet radiation (UVR) dose needed to induce a significant DTH inhibition in several groups of 15 volunteers. Two minimal erythemal doses (2 MED) were found to be the minimal immunosuppressive dose (MISD). As a result, the immune DTH response is reduced in average by 36%. The lower doses tested (0.5 and 1 MED) were ineffective. Sunscreen-treated groups were exposed to either 1 or 2 MED x SPF doses. As expected, no alteration in DTH response was observed in the groups exposed to 1 MED x SPF whatever the sunscreen applied. In contrast, after exposure to 2 MED x SPF, the DTH response remained unaltered in the group pretreated with the sunscreen product with the higher protection in the UVA range but was significantly suppressed by 55.7% in the group pretreated with sunscreen with a much lower protection in the UVA range. These data suggest that SPF may not be sufficient to predict the ability of sunscreens to protect from UV-induced immune suppression. Determining the level of UVA protection is particularly needed, as UVA seems to have a relatively low contribution to erythema but is highly involved in immunosuppression.


Subject(s)
Hypersensitivity, Delayed/etiology , Hypersensitivity, Delayed/prevention & control , Sunscreening Agents/pharmacology , Ultraviolet Rays/adverse effects , Adolescent , Adult , Antigens/administration & dosage , Humans , Hypersensitivity, Delayed/immunology , Immune Tolerance/drug effects , Immune Tolerance/radiation effects , Male , Sunburn/etiology , Sunburn/immunology , Sunburn/prevention & control
3.
J Invest Dermatol ; 117(5): 1186-92, 2001 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11710931

ABSTRACT

It is well established that ultraviolet radiation has immunomodulatory effects that may be involved in skin cancer. Recent studies have shown that ultraviolet A radiation (320-400 nm) as well as ultraviolet B (290-320 nm) is immunosuppressive. This means sunscreens that mainly absorb ultraviolet B (protection against erythema) may be less effective in preventing ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression than broad-spectrum products. We have studied the effects of ultraviolet A exposure on the human delayed-type hypersensitivity response and compared the efficacy of sunscreens having different levels of ultraviolet A protection under both solar-simulated radiation and outdoor real-life solar exposure conditions. Delayed-type hypersensitivity was assessed using recall antigens. In a first study, two groups of volunteers were exposed to ultraviolet A (either full spectrum ultraviolet A or ultraviolet A1) without prior application of sunscreen and they were shown to exhibit significantly reduced delayed-type hypersensitivity responses. In order to compare the efficacy of sunscreens in preventing photoimmunosuppression, three groups of subjects received 10 cumulative exposures to solar-simulated radiation; one group was exposed unprotected and the other two were exposed after being applied either a ultraviolet B or a broad-spectrum sunscreen, each with the same sun protection factor 9, but with different ultraviolet A protection factors 9 and 2. Then, an outdoor study was conducted in which delayed-type hypersensitivity was assessed before and after six daily exposures. Two different groups of subjects were treated with one of two sunscreens having the same sun protection factor 25 but different ultraviolet A-protection factors. In unprotected volunteers, responses to delayed-type hypersensitivity tests were significantly reduced irrespective of ultraviolet exposure conditions (full spectrum ultraviolet A, ultraviolet A1, solar-simulated radiation). The ultraviolet B sunscreen failed to protect from solar- simulated radiation-induced immunosuppression. In contrast, the broad-spectrum sunscreen having the same sun protection factor but providing high protection in the ultraviolet A range significantly reduced local ultraviolet-induced immunosuppression and prevented the distal effects. In the outdoor study, as compared with delayed-type hypersensitivity responses obtained before sun exposure, no alteration of immune response was detected when the skin was protected by broad-spectrum sunscreen sun protection factor 25 and ultraviolet A-protection factor 14. Conversely, a broad-spectrum sunscreen sun protection factor 25 ultraviolet A-protection factor 6 failed to protect against the sun-impaired response. The above studies clearly demonstrate the role of ultraviolet A in the induction of photoimmunosuppression together with the need for sunscreen products providing efficient photoprotection throughout the entire ultraviolet spectrum.


Subject(s)
Hypersensitivity, Delayed/physiopathology , Sunscreening Agents/pharmacology , Adult , Female , Humans , Immunosuppression Therapy , Male , Sunlight , Ultraviolet Rays
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL