Enhanced cancer growth in mice administered daily human-equivalent doses of some H1-antihistamines: predictive in vitro correlates.
BACKGROUND
Present studies of drug-induced tumor growth promotion have evolved from earlier investigations into the mechanism of action of N,N-diethyl-2-[4-(phenylmethyl)phenoxy[ethanamine.HCl, a tamoxifen derivative which potently inhibits lymphocyte mitogenesis in vitro and stimulates tumor growth in vivo. It is thought that potency to bind to intracellular histamine receptors (HIC), some of which are on cytochromes P450, may correlate with tumor growth-promoting activity.


OBJECTIVE
We assessed the effectiveness of five in vitro assays in predicting in vivo tumor growth stimulation by the H1-antihistamines loratadine, astemizole, cetirizine, hydroxyzine, and doxylamine.


METHODS
Potency of each agent was ranked 1-5 in each of the following in vitro assays: 1) inhibition of [3H]histamine binding to microsomal HIC, 2) inhibition of histamine binding to microsomal P450, 3) inhibition of the P450-catalyzed demethylation of aminopyrine, 4) inhibition of lymphocyte mitogenesis, and 5) stimulation of tumor colony formation. An overall rank score was assigned to each drug and correlated with tumor growth stimulation in vivo. Two laboratories conducted in vivo studies in a blinded fashion. Female C57BL and C3H mice were given a subcutaneous injection on day 1 of syngeneic B16F10 melanoma cells (5 x 10(5)) or C-3 fibrosarcoma cells (1 x 10(5)), respectively. Mice were randomly assigned to treatment groups, then received a single, daily intraperitoneal injection of an estimated human-equivalent dose (or range of doses) of antihistamine or vehicle control for 18-21 days before being killed. Tumors were surgically removed and wet weights compared statistically among groups.


RESULTS
The cumulative potency of each drug in affecting tumor growth or growth mechanisms in the five in vitro assays ranked as follows: Loratidine and astemizole ranked highest and were equally potent, followed in decreasing order by hydroxyzine, doxylamine, and cetirizine. A significant correlation (r = .97; P < .02) was observed between the rank order of potency of the antihistamines in all five in vitro assays and the rank order to enhance tumor growth in vivo: Loratidine and astemizole significantly (P < .001) promoted the growth of both melanoma and fibrosarcoma, hydroxyzine significantly (P < .001) promoted the growth of melanoma, while doxylamine and cetirizine did not promote the growth of either tumor.


CONCLUSIONS
Data demonstrate that the in vitro assays predicted the propensity of each H1-antihistamine to stimulate cancer growth in vivo.


CONCLUSIONS
These in vitro tests may prove valuable to screen potential tumor growth promoters.
Brandes
L J
LJ
Department of Medicine, Manitoba Institute of Cell Biology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Warrington
R C
RC
Arron
R J
RJ
Bogdanovic
R P
RP
Fang
W
W
Queen
G M
GM
Stein
D A
DA
Tong
J
J
Zaborniak
C L
CL
LaBella
F S
FS
D000818:Animals; D016589:Astemizole / Q000633:toxicity; D002273:Carcinogens / Q000633:toxicity*; D017332:Cetirizine / Q000633:toxicity; D004319:Doxylamine / Q000633:toxicity; D005260:Female; D006634:Histamine H1 Antagonists / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000633:toxicity*; D006919:Hydroxyzine / Q000633:toxicity; D017336:Loratadine / Q000633:toxicity; D008546:Melanoma, Experimental / Q000139:chemically induced*; D051379:Mice; D008809:Mice, Inbred C3H; D008810:Mice, Inbred C57BL; D051381:Rats; D017207:Rats, Sprague-Dawley
D002273:Carcinogens; D006634:Histamine H1 Antagonists; D006919:Hydroxyzine; D017336:Loratadine; D016589:Astemizole; D004319:Doxylamine; D017332:Cetirizine