{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020209580838323353, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0029940119760479044, 'mean_word_length': 5.049773755656108, '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}}
Tumor promotion: models and assay systems.

Tumor promotion is defined operationally from two-stage models of experimental carcinogenesis. It is, therefore, in a strict sense, possible to identify tumor promoters only from such models. The development and use of in vitro two-stage cell transformation assays was a logical extension toward in vitro short-term testing for tumor promoters. Another approach is to apply mechanistic knowledge of the tumor promotion process in developing end points for such assays. In this context, we have been examining the role of blocked gap-junctional intercellular communication (GJIC) in tumor promotion, using in vitro and in vivo systems. Many promoters have been shown to block GJIC in vitro; our studies support the idea that inhibition of GJIC does play an important role in the promotion stage of BALB/c 3T3 cell transformation. In animal studies, we have shown that the rat liver tumor promoter phenobarbital can decrease the level of expression of the 32 Kd gap junction protein gene specifically in liver upon systemic exposure in rats. Further examination of the role of GJIC in tumor promotion is indeed warranted. Also, deployment of in vitro GJIC and transformation assay systems should provide useful short-term tests for detecting tumor promoting activity of environmental chemicals.