6
Other Organic Compounds and Dental Caries
K E N N E T H O. M A D S E N
Downloaded by CORNELL UNIV on May 21, 2017 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: June 1, 1970 | doi: 10.1021/ba-1970-0094.ch006
Dental Branch, University of Texas, Houston, Tex.
Caries in experimental animals may be influenced by the dietary administration of a wide variety of organic compounds. Some influences are attributed to physiological or pharmacological effects. Phenolic acids, polyphenols, antioxidants, antienzymes, carbonyl binding agents, and complexing agents as well as organic polymers all affect caries production. Anticaries activity was widespread in the outer coverings of seeds under all conditions studied. Naturally occurring anticariogenicity was also noted in unrefined sugar products, cocoa, and chocolate.
Many
naturally occurring and synthetic organic substances when added to the diet have an influence on caries. Some, including organic phosphates and fluorides, have been reviewed elsewhere in this symposium. Primarily, the results from compounds that influence caries in experimental animals w i l l be discussed in this paper. Most of the compounds tested in clinical studies as components of toothpaste, mouthwashes, and chewing gum have been reviewed in detail elsewhere (48, 146, 149) and w i l l be considered here in summary manner. Thousands of compounds have been screened by a variety of in vitro testing procedures, most involving microbiological assays where microorganisms came from saliva or dental plaque or are strains suspected of being important in the caries process. Usually, the effect of the compound on total acid production, p H , or growth is measured. Shaw concluded i n 1959 in an excellent review of caries-inhibiting agents (149) that "no specific in vitro test procedure has been shown to have a sufficiently good correlation with clinical trials to merit confidence. Such testing, of course, provides one means for finding suitable compounds for subsequent trial at the experimental animal stage prior to clinical evaluation. Although it is appropriate to mention the most likely compounds discovered in screening and in vitro tests, primarily ,,
55 Harris; Dietary Chemicals vs. Dental Caries Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1970.
56
DIETARY
C H E M I C A L S
o n l y those c o m p o u n d s tested b o t h in vitro
VS.
D E N T A L
CARIES
a n d i n e x p e r i m e n t a l caries
assays w i l l b e c o n s i d e r e d i n this discussion. T h e c o m p o u n d s c o n s i d e r e d w i l l b e classified a r b i t r a r i l y o n the basis of c e r t a i n of t h e i r c h e m i c a l s i m i l a r i t i e s , o n w h e t h e r or not t h e y a p p e a r to h a v e a specific a c t i o n o n caries, a n d w h e t h e r t h e i r effect o n caries m a y b e a consequence of t h e i r p h y s i o l o g i c a l or p h a r m a c o l o g i c a l a c t i v i t y . T h e a r r a y of factors i n f l u e n c i n g e a c h of the different d e n t a l caries studies c i t e d i n this r e v i e w w a s not o n l y l a r g e b u t often d i f f i c u l t to determine.
A c c o r d i n g l y , the factors i n c l u d e d i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of
each
assay w e r e those c o n s i d e r e d most significant either f o r the p a r t i c u l a r Downloaded by CORNELL UNIV on May 21, 2017 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: June 1, 1970 | doi: 10.1021/ba-1970-0094.ch006
s t u d y or f o r c o m p a r i n g i t w i t h other studies.
Whenever it appeared
that a substance o r c o m p o u n d h a d h a d a statistically significant or other v a l i d effect o n caries, s u c h has b e e n stated s i m p l y . N o a t t e m p t has b e e n m a d e to d e s c r i b e the extent of the effects—e.g., percentage
inhibition—
since this t y p e of e v a l u a t i o n is h i g h l y relative a n d s o m e w h a t m i s l e a d i n g . If effects c a n b e e s t a b l i s h e d as r e a l , or not, i t is a s s u m e d that t h e y c a n b e m a d e m o r e or less d r a m a t i c b y v a r y i n g assay c o n d i t i o n s .
The
assay
c o n d i t i o n s h a v e b e e n d e s c r i b e d i n d e t a i l w h e n effects w e r e f o u n d . Materials and
Methods
A l t h o u g h this p a p e r is p r i m a r i l y a r e v i e w , some p e r t i n e n t n e w d a t a f r o m the a u t h o r s l a b o r a t o r y w i l l b e discussed. T h e s e d a t a w e r e o b t a i n e d b y m e t h o d s s i m i l a r to those p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d (109, 110,
112).
I n the e a r l y studies w i t h or r e l a t e d to seed h u l l anticaries a c t i v i t y (108,110,
111; T a b l e I ) a n d w i t h c e d a r w o o d , c o t t o n rats w e r e p l a c e d o n
the c a r i o g e n i c d i e t as 1 8 - d a y - o l d w e a n l i n g s f o r 14 weeks, after w h i c h caries scores f o r a l l three molars w e r e m e a s u r e d a n d r e p o r t e d . Table I.
Group 1 2 3 4 5 6
Comparison of Caries and Decalcification Inhibiting Abilities of Diets Containing Seed Coverings
Material Studied None Rice hulls Cottonseed hulls Peanut hulls Pecan hulls R i c e b r a n (solventextracted)
Caries Assay* No. Carious Lesions, Mean zb S.E.M.
In vitro
Assay
Enamel Dissolved, Mg
Acid Produced, Ml, 0 . 0 5 N
1.2 2.2 3.1 3.7 2.3
1.7 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.9
26.4 20.7 28.1 23.8 31.3
19.0 zb 1.7
0.5
28.0
25.8 17.3 20.5 18.2 16.7
zb =b zb ± ±
° Control score significantly reduced by all materials fed; P
