The oral antidiabetics glibenclamide, glipizide, glymidine, tolazamide and tolbutamide and the diuretics bemetizide, bendroflumethiazide, benzylhydrochlorothiazide, bumetanide, butizide, furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide, hydroflumethiazide and trichlormethiazide were investigated for phototoxic effects in hairless mice. The back of the animals (hr/hr-c3H/TifBom) was covered with Duoderm dressing, and at the site of two punched out holes 0.05 ml of the test substances at 0.25 mol/l concentration and the solvent alone as control were injected intradermally, respectively. Both test and control sites were irradiated with 6-12 J/cm2 of longwave UVA light from a "Bluelight 2000" apparatus (Hönle, Martinsried, Germany). Skin reactions were read at 24 and 48 h. Compared to the solvent alone, all of the test substances induced reactions (necrosis or oedema)--most frequently seen by macroscopic and histologic investigation and by measurements with a thickness gage. Injection of the test substance or solvent alone without or with subsequent UVA irradiation, as well as UVA alone, did not induce measurable skin changes in this model. Three oral antidiabetics and four diuretics, not yet described to induce photosensitivity in vitro nor in vivo, were detected as potential photosensitizers using our animal model.

Animals↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Phototoxicity to sulphonamide derived oral antidiabetics and diuretics. Comparative in vitro and in vivo investigations.

The oral antidiabetics chlorpropamide, glibenclamide, glipizide, gliquiudone, glymidine, tolazamide and tolbutamide, and the diuretics bemetizide, bendroflumethiazide, benzylhydrochlorothiazide, bumetanide, butizide, chlortalidone, furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide, hydroflumethiazide, indapamide, piretanide, polythiazide, trichlormethiazide, and xipamide were investigated for potential phototoxicity in vitro using a cell culture model, and in vivo in hairless mice. After exposure to broad band UVA, the majority of the substances tested in vitro yielded a phototoxic action leading to loss of culture forming ability. In vivo, all tested substances induced edema or ulceration, and lead to a significantly increase in skin fold thickness of the mouse skin. In all, a number of substances not described to induce clinical photosensitivity nor phototoxicity in vitro or in vivo were detected in our testing. When determining potential photosensitizers, it seems important to utilize different test methods, as not all substances will exhibit action in a given assay.

Administration, Oral↗