{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04181494661921708, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020462633451957295, 'mean_word_length': 5.859756097560975, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effects of testosterone, dihydrotestosterone and estrogen on 3,2′‐dimethyl‐4‐aminobiphenyl‐induced rat prostate carcinogenesis

Post‐initiation effects of testosterone propionate (TP), α‐dihydrotestosterone (DHT) and ethinyl estradiol (EE) on 3,2′‐dJmethyl‐4‐aminobiphenyl (DMAB)‐prostate carcinogenesis in F344 rats have been investigated by administration of each hormone individually or either androgen in combination with EE. DNAB plus TP resulted in induction of invasive adenocarcinomas in the lateral and anterior prostate and seminal vesicles, as shown in a previous study, whereas DHT did not exhibit any positive modulation potential. Administration of EE together with TP produced increased carcinoma incidence in the lateral and anterior prostate, from 17 and 28% to 70% and 80%, respectively. Dorsal prostate tumors, all of the non‐invasive in situ type, were also evident in 30% of animals receiving both TP and EE. Rats treated with DHT plus EE, however, did not develop tumors. Our experiment thus provides evidence that estrogen may play an important role in prostate carcinogenesis. © 1994 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.