title: Short-term comparative study of the cyclophosphamide genotoxicity administered free and liposome-encapsulated in mice.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Cyclophosphamide (CYP) is used to treat a wide range of human tumors. However, the mutagenic effect of CYP is still the primary limitation for wider applications to treat a variety of human malignancies. It has been reported that CYP entrapped in liposomes reduces non-specific toxicity and enhances anticancer effects in animal systems.
  
  
  METHODS
  In the present experiment, mice were injected with 50 mg/kg free CYP or encapsulated in liposomes to compare their ability to induce mutagenic damages including chromosomal aberrations, changes in Sister Chromatid Exchange (SCEs) frequencies, and in Mitotic Index (MI), as well as in cell cycle kinetics.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both forms of CYP induced an increase in chromosomal aberrations and SCEs at the different sampling time. On the contrary, a decrease in mitotic index and delay in cell cycle kinetics was observed at all stages of the experiment.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Encapsulation of CYP increased its mutagenicity, especially at a longer sampling time. This may due to interaction of liposomes with cells which is mainly through endocytosis or fusion resulting in accumulation of drug inside the cell causing chromosomal damage. Further evaluation of possible toxicity of encapsulation drugs in healthy tissue is needed.
authors: Dept. of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Beni-Suef University, Egypt.
authors: Ehab Mohammed
authors: EM
authors: Abdella
keywords: Cyclophosphamide; Genotoxicity; Liposome-encapsulated; Mice; Sister Chromatid Exchanges
references: J Drug Target. 2002 May;10(3):185-92
references: 12075819
references: Somatic Cell Genet. 1978 Jul;4(4):393-405
references: 356290
references: Mutat Res. 1987 Oct;189(2):157-65
references: 3657831
references: Indian J Biochem Biophys. 2009 Feb;46(1):45-52
references: 19374253
references: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999 Oct;40(11):2561-7
references: 10509650
references: J Clin Oncol. 1999 May;17(5):1425-34
references: 10334527
references: J Med Genet. 1992 Feb;29(2):109-11
references: 1613760
references: Chromosoma. 1978 Sep 11;68(4):303-11
references: 81738
references: Curr Pharm Des. 1999 Aug;5(8):555-60
references: 10469891
references: Reprod Toxicol. 2007 Nov-Dec;24(3-4):365-70
references: 17624719
references: Free Radic Biol Med. 2004 Sep 15;37(6):793-802
references: 15304255
references: Genetics. 1983 Sep;105(1):169-79
references: 6618167
references: Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002 Jun;16(2):311-34
references: 12064895
references: In Vivo. 2006 Jan-Feb;20(1):129-35
references: 16433041
references: J Androl. 2004 May-Jun;25(3):354-62
references: 15064312
references: Biol Reprod. 2003 Oct;69(4):1150-7
references: 12773405
references: Br J Cancer. 1985 May;51(5):681-9
references: 3994911
references: Biochim Biophys Acta. 1993 Sep 19;1151(2):201-15
references: 8373796
references: Toxicology. 2008 Jun 27;248(2-3):96-103
references: 18485558
references: Mech Ageing Dev. 1981 Dec;17(4):327-30
references: 6799710
references: Toxicol Sci. 2003 Apr;72(2):359-62
references: 12655038
references: Mutat Res. 1995 Aug;330(1-2):115-81
references: 7623863
references: Pharm Res. 1995 Oct;12(10):1407-16
references: 8584472