Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Medical Toxicology logoLink to Journal of Medical Toxicology
. 2007 Mar;3(1):1–6. doi: 10.1007/BF03161031

The effect of amifostine, a cytoprotective agent, on paraquat toxicity in mice

Brandon K Wills 1,2,✉, Steven E Aks 1,3, Gerry E Maloney 1, James W Rhee 1, Rhonda Brand 4, Marin Sekosan 5
PMCID: PMC3550126  PMID: 18072151

Abstract

Background

Paraquat (PQ) is a highly poisonous herbicide with a variety of toxic effects, most notably pulmonary fibrosis. In alveolar epithelial cells, it is converted to a PQ radical and subsequently generates other reactive species resulting in lipid peroxidation and cell destruction. Amifostine is a thiophosphate prodrug approved by the FDA for the prevention of toxicities associated with cisplatin and therapeutic radiation. When amifostine is converted to an active metabolite (WR-1065), it functions as an oxygen and DNA radical scavenger that has been shown to protect against lipoperoxidation. The aim of this study was to determine whether amifostine improves survival or lung injury resulting from PQ toxicity.

Methods

Swiss mice (n = 23 per group) were given an approximate LD75 dose of PQ intraperitoneal (60 mg/kg). Thirty minutes prior to PQ injection, group 1 was pretreated with 200 mg/kg of amifostine subcutaneously (s.c.). Subsequent doses of amifostine at 75 mg/kg were administered 4 hours after PQ injection, and injections continued every 8 hours for a total of 6 doses (cumulative dose: 575 mg/kg). Four hours after PQ injection, group 2 received 200 mg/kg of amifostine subcutaneously. Subsequent doses of amifostine at 75 mg/kg were administered every 8 hours (cumulative dose: 575 mg/kg). Four hours after PQ injection, group 3 received 100 mg/kg of amifostine subcutaneously. Subsequent doses of amifostine at 30 mg/kg were administered every 8 hours (cumulative dose: 250 mg/kg). Group 4 received equivolume injections of sterile 0.9% saline s.c. at the same time intervals. We removed lungs from all mice for histologic analysis and injury scoring.

Results

The number of surviving mice in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 17, 18, 17, and 17 respectively. The Kaplan-Meier with log rank analysis showed no differences in survival. Lung injury scores did not differ between treatment groups and the control group for either dead or surviving mice.

Conclusion

Amifostine does not appear to improve survival or lung injury due to PQ toxicity at the doses administered.

Keywords: amifostine, paraquat, poisoning, cytoprotective agent, antidote

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (282.3 KB).

Footnotes

This study was funded by the American College of Medical Toxicology, Ortho-McNeil Research Award for Medical Toxicology Fellows-In-Training; awarded June, 2004. An abstract of this data was presented at the North American Congress of Clinical Toxicology annual meeting, Orlando, FL, September 2005.

References

  • 1.Forman HJ, Aldrich TK, Posner MA, Fisher AB. Differential paraquat uptake and redox kinetics of rat granular pneumocytes and alveolar macrophages. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1982;221(2):428–433. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Dusinska M, Kovacikova Z, Vallova B, Collins A. Responses of alveolar macrophages and epithelial type II cells to oxidative DNA damage caused by paraquat. Carcinogenesis. 1998;19(5):809–812. doi: 10.1093/carcin/19.5.809. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sorensen M, Loft S. No significant paraquat-induced oxidative DNA damage in rats. Free Radic Res. 2000;32(5):423–428. doi: 10.1080/10715760000300421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Lin JL, Leu ML, Liu YC, Chen GH. A prospective clinical trial of pulse therapy with glucocorticoid and cyclophosphamide in moderate to severe paraquat-poisoned patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;159(2):357–360. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.159.2.9803089. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Newstead CG. Cyclophosphamide treatment of paraquat poisoning. Thorax. 1996;51(7):659–660. doi: 10.1136/thx.51.7.659. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Lin JL, Lin-Tan DT, Chen KH, Huang WH. Repeated pulse of methylprednisolone and cyclophosphamide with continuous dexamethasone therapy for patients with severe paraquat poisoning. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(2):368–373. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000195013.47004.A8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Vijayaraghavan R, Kumar P, Joshi U, et al. Prophylactic efficacy of amifostine and its analogues against sulphur mustard toxicity. Toxicology. 2001;163(2–3):83–91. doi: 10.1016/S0300-483X(01)00369-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Wills BK, Haller NA, Peter D, White LJ. Use of amifostine, a novel cytoprotective, in alpha-amanitin poisoning. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2005;43(4):261–267. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Koukourakis MI. Amifostine in clinical oncology: current use and future applications. Anticancer Drugs. 2002;13(3):181–209. doi: 10.1097/00001813-200203000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Spencer CM, Goa KL. Amifostine. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential as a radioprotector and cytotoxic chemoprotector. Drugs. 1995;50(6):1001–1031. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199550060-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Marzatico F, Porta C, Moroni M, et al. In vitro antioxidant properties of amifostine (WR-2721, Ethyol) Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2000;45(2):172–176. doi: 10.1007/s002800050026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Saenghirunvattana S, Sermswan A, Piratchvej V, Rochanawutanon M, Kaojarern S, Rattananenya T. Effect of lung irradiation on mice following paraquat intoxication. Chest. 1992;101(3):833–835. doi: 10.1378/chest.101.3.833. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Yamamoto H. Protection against paraquat-induced toxicity with sulfite or thiosulfate in mice. Toxicology. 1993;79(1):37–43. doi: 10.1016/0300-483X(93)90204-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ali S, Diwakar G, Pawa S. Paraquat induces different pulmonary biochemical responses in Wistar rats and Swiss mice. Chem Biol Interact. 2000;125(2):79–91. doi: 10.1016/S0009-2797(99)00167-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Cheng WH, Ho YS, Valentine BA, Ross DA, Combs GF, Lei XG. Cellular glutathione peroxidase is the mediator of body selenium to protect against paraquat lethality in transgenic mice. J Nutr. 1998;128(7):1070–1076. doi: 10.1093/jn/128.7.1070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Wegener T, Sandhagen B, Chan KW, Saldeen T. N-acetyl-cysteine in paraquat toxicity: toxicological and histological evaluation in rats. Ups J Med Sci. 1988;93(1):81–89. doi: 10.1517/03009734000000041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Pond SM. Manifestations and management of paraquat poisoning. Med J Aust. 1990;152(5):256–259. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1990.tb120922.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bismuth C, Garnier R, Baud FJ, Muszynski J, Keyes C. Paraquat poisoning. An overview of the current status. Drug Saf. 1990;5(4):243–251. doi: 10.2165/00002018-199005040-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rasey JS, Grunbaum Z, Krohn KA, Menard TW, Spence AM. Biodistribution of the radioprotective drug 35S-labeled 3-amino-2-hydroxypropyl phosphorothioate (WR77913) Radiat Res. 1985;102(1):130–137. doi: 10.2307/3576436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Links M, Lewis C. Chemoprotectants: a review of their clinical pharmacology and therapeutic efficacy. Drugs. 1999;57(3):293–308. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199957030-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Rojas A, Stewart FA, Soranson JA, Smith KA, Denekamp J. Fractionation studies with WR-2721: normal tissues and tumour. Radiother Oncol. 1986;6(1):51–60. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8140(86)80109-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Medical Toxicology are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES