Cytogenetic damage induced by mouthrinses formulations in vivo and in vitro

dc.contributor.authorCarlin, Viviane [UNIFESP]
dc.contributor.authorMatsumoto, Mariza Akemi
dc.contributor.authorSaraiva, Patricia Pinto
dc.contributor.authorArtioli, André José
dc.contributor.authorOshima, Celina Tizuko Fujiyama [UNIFESP]
dc.contributor.authorRibeiro, Daniel Araki [UNIFESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.contributor.institutionUSC
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-24T14:27:18Z
dc.date.available2016-01-24T14:27:18Z
dc.date.issued2012-06-01
dc.description.abstractThe aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate DNA damage and cellular death in cells exposed to various commercially available mouthrinses: ListerineA (R) CepacolA (R), Plax alcohol freeA (R), PeriogardA (R), and Plax WhiteningA (R). A total of 75 volunteers were included in the search distributed into five groups containing 15 people each for in vivo study. Exfoliated buccal mucosa cells were collected immediately before mouthrinse exposure and after 2 weeks. Furthermore, blood samples were obtained from three healthy donors for in vitro study. the micronucleus test was used to evaluate mutagenicity and cytotoxicity in vivo. the single-cell gel (comet) assay was used to determine DNA damage in vitro. After 2 weeks exposure, PeriogardA (R) showed 1.8% of micronucleated cells with significant statistical differences ( < 0.05) compared to before exposure (0.27%). Plax WhiteningA (R) presented high tail moment value (4.5) when compared to negative control (0.6). the addition of all mouthrinses to cells incubated with methyl methanesulfonate did not alter the number of strand breaks in the genetic material. ListerineA (R) was able to reduce genetic damage induced by hydrogen peroxide because a decrease of tail moment was noticed. the results of the present study suggest that PeriogardA (R) and Plax WhiteningA (R) can induce genetic damage, whereas ListerineA (R) is an antioxidant agent. Since DNA damage is considered to be prime mechanism during chemical carcinogenesis, these data may be relevant in risk assessment for protecting human health and preventing carcinogenesis.en
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Federal de São Paulo UNIFESP, Dept Biociencias, BR-11060001 Santos, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, UNIFESP, Dept Patol, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUSC, Dept Ciencias Saude, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Biociencias, UNIFESP, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUnifespUniversidade Federal de São Paulo UNIFESP, Dept Biociencias, BR-11060001 Santos, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUnifespUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, UNIFESP, Dept Patol, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationUnifespUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Biociencias, UNIFESP, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.sourceWeb of Science
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
dc.format.extent813-820
dc.identifierhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0559-2
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Investigations. Heidelberg: Springer Heidelberg, v. 16, n. 3, p. 813-820, 2012.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00784-011-0559-2
dc.identifier.issn1432-6981
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/34940
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000304173900017
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Investigations
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.rights.licensehttp://www.springer.com/open+access/authors+rights?SGWID=0-176704-12-683201-0
dc.subjectBuccal mucosa cellsen
dc.subjectMouthrinsesen
dc.subjectGenetic damageen
dc.subjectCellular deathen
dc.subjectMicronucleus testen
dc.subjectSingle-cell gel (comet) assayen
dc.titleCytogenetic damage induced by mouthrinses formulations in vivo and in vitroen
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
Arquivos
Coleções