Specific Locus Mutations in the Monitoring of Human Populations for Genetic Damage

  • Arthur D. Bloom
Part of the Environmental Science Research book series (ESRH, volume 28)

Abstract

My primary argument in this paper is that in terms of the genetic monitoring of human populations, induced somatic mutation must be our major future concern. This is not to say that germ cell effects in humans are medically trivial. It is simply to say that the best evidence we now have is that somatic mutation may be a major cause of disease, particularly in genetically at-risk persons. We have no such evidence for the effects of induced germinal mutations in man; and I would, therefore, submit that our focus in future research efforts should be the identification of these genetically at-risk individuals.

Keywords

Lymphoma Leukemia Anemia Germinal Adduct 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. G. Knudson, H. W. Hethcote, and B. W. Brown, Mutation and childhood cancer: a probabilistic model for the incidence of retinoblastoma, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 72:5116–5120 (1975).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Cohen, F. P. Li, S. Berg, D. J. Marchetto, S. Tsai, S. C. Jacobs, and R. S. Brown, Hereditary renal-cell carcinoma associated with a chromosomal translocation, N. Engl. J. Med., 31:592–595 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    V. A. McKusick, Mendelian Inheritance in Man, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1979).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. G. Knudson, Persons at high risk of cancer, N. Engl. J. Med. 301:606–607 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. D. Auerbach and S. R. Wolman, Susceptibility of Fanconi anemia fibroblasts to chromosomal damage by carcinogens, Nature 261:494–496 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. D. Auerbach, B. Adler, and R. S. R. Chaganti, Prenatal and postnatal diagnosis and carrier detection of Fanconi anemia by a cytogenetic method, Ped., 67(1):128–135 (1981).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. A. Barone, Neurofibromatosis: A clinical overview, Postgrad Med., 66(2):73–82 (1979).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. A. Knight, W. K. Murphy, and J. A. Gottlieb, Neurofibromatosis associated with malignant neurofibromas, Arch. Dermatol., 107:747–750 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. L. Bader and R. W. Miller, Neurofibromatosis and childhood leukemia, J. Ped., 92(6):925–929 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. S. Ginsburg, E. Hrnandez, and J. W. Johnson, Sarcoma complicating von Recklinghausen disease in pregnancy, Obstet. Gynecol., 58(3):385–387 (1981).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. M. Grunberg and W. A. Haseltine, Use of an indicator sequence of human DNA to study DNA damage by methylbis (2-chloro-ethy1) amine, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 77(11):6546–6550 (1980).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. F. Martin and W. A. Haseltine, Range of radiochemical damage to DNA with decay of iodine-125, Science, 213:896–898 (1981).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. M. Cooper and P. E. Neiman, Two distinct candidate transforming genes of lymphoid leukosis virus-induced neoplasms, Nature, 292:857–858 (1981).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guidelines for Studies of Human Populations Exposed to Mutagenic and Reproductive Hazards, A. D. Bloom, ed., pp. 1–35, March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation, White Plains, New York (1981).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Liebeskind, R. Bases, F. Mendez, F. Elequin, and M. Koenigsberg, Sister chromatid exchanges in human lymphocytes after exposure to diagnostic ultrasound, Science, 205:1273–1275 (1979).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. E. Kaufman, Ultrasound is a weak mutagen in mammalian cells, Abstracts, Annual Meeting of the Radiation Research Society (1982).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arthur D. Bloom
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Physicians & SurgeonsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations