Wykrywanie i ocena aktywności związków hormonalnie aktywnych

• Autorzy: Minta M. , Stypula-Trebas S.

Warianty tytułu

EN

Hormonally active compounds – identification and assessment

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

EN

During the last two decades concerns have been raised regarding the possible harmful effects of exposure to certain chemicals (natural and synthetic) that can modulate or disrupt the endocrine system (endocrine disrupters, EDs). Their identification and assessment is complicated by a number of mechanisms on which they act. As a result a variety of in silico/in vitro/in vivo methods are used. In this paper the most valuable methods for initial assessment, screening and testing are reviewed. To protect public health, future risk assessment of endocrine disrupters must take into account exposure to the mixtures in which different compounds can interact. The development of fast and sensitive bioassays is crucial to the achievement of this goal.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

zdrowie publiczne; zagrozenia zdrowia; produkty spozywcze; substancje biologicznie czynne; zwiazki hormonalnie aktywne; wykrywanie; identyfikacja; badania in vivo; badania in vitro

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Medycyna Weterynaryjna
• Rocznik: 2012
• Tom: 68
• Numer: 01
• Opis fizyczny: s.25-29,tab.,bibliogr.

Twórcy

autor

Minta M.

• Zakład Farmakologii i Toksykologii, Państwowy Instytut Weterynaryjny - Państwowy Instytut Badawczy, Al.Partyzantów 57, 24-100 Puławy

autor

Stypula-Trebas S.

Bibliografia

• 1.Anon.: (1983) OECD TG 415 One-Generation Reproduction Toxicity Study.
• 2.Anon.: (1983) OECD TG 416 Two-Generation Reproduction Toxicity Study (updated 2001).
• 3.Anon.: (1995) OECD TG 407: Repeated dose 28-day oral toxicity study in rodents. (Enhanced: updated 2008).
• 4.Anon.: (1995) OECD TG 421 Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test.
• 5.Anon.: (1996) OECD TG 422 Combined Repeated Dose Toxicity Study with the Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test.
• 6.Anon.: (2007) OECD TG 440: Uterotrophic bioassay in rodents: A short-term screening test for oestrogenic properties.
• 7.Anon.: (2009) OECD TG 441: Hershberger bioassay in rats. A short-term screening assay for (anti) androgenic properties.
• 8.Anon.: (2009) OECD TG 455: Stably transfected human estrogen receptor-α transcriptional activation assay for detection of estrogenic agonist-activity of chemicals.
• 9.Ashby J.: Scientific issues associated with the validation of in vitro and in vivo methods for assessing endocrine disrupting chemicals. Toxicology 2002, 181-182, 389-397.
• 10.Baker V. A.: Endocrine disrupters - testing strategies to assess human hazard. Toxicol. in Vitro 2001, 15, 413-419.
• 11.Baldwin W. S., Curtis S. W., Caulhen C. A., Risinger J. I., Korach K. S., Barrett J. C.: BG-1 ovarian cell line: an alternative model for examining estrogen-dependent growth in vitro. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Anim. 1998, 34, 649-654.
• 12.Bay K., Asklund C., Skakkebaek N. E., Andersson A.-M.: Testicular dysgenesis syndrome: possible role of endocrine disruptors. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2006, 20, 77-90.
• 13.Behnisch P. A., Hosoe K., Sakai S.: Bioanalytical screening methods for dioxins and dioxin-like compounds – a review of bioassay/biomarker technology. Environ. Internat. 2001, 27, 413-439.
• 14.Blaauboer B. J.: The applicability of in vitro-derived data in hazard identification and characterisation of chemicals. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2002, 11, 213-225.
• 15.Bovee T. F. H., Helsdingen R. J. R., Koks P. D., Kuiper H. A., Hoogenboom R. L. A. P., Keijer J.: Development of rapid yeast estrogen bioassay, based on the expression of green fluorescent protein. Gene 2004, 325, 187-200.
• 16.Charles G. D.: In vitro models in endocrine disruptor screening. ILAR J. 2004, 45, 491-501.
• 17.Charles G. D., Linscombe V. A., Tornesi B., Matson J. L., Gollapudi B. B.: An in vitro screening paradigm for extracts of whole foods for detection of potential toxicants. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2002, 40, 1391-1402.
• 18.Clode S. A.: Assessment of in vivo assays for endocrine disruption. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metabol. 2006, 20, 35-43.
• 19.Diel P., Schmidt S., Vollmer G.: In vivo systems for the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the biological activity of phytoestrogens. J. Chromatogr. B 2002, 777, 191-202.
• 20.Filby A. L., Neuparth T., Thorpe K. L., Owen R., Galloway T. S., Tyler C. R.: Health impact of estrogens in the environment, considering complex mixture effects. Environ. Health Perspect. 2007, 115, 1704-1710.
• 21.Gazdar A., Oie H., Shackleton C., Chen T., Triche T., Myers C., Chrousos G., Brennan M., Stein C., La Rocca R.: Establishment and characterization of a human adrenocortical carcinoma cell line that expresses multiple pathways of steroid biosynthesis. Cancer Res. 1990, 50, 5488-5496.
• 22.Gelbke H. P., Kayser M., Poole A.: OECD test strategies and methods for endocrine disruptors. Toxicology 2004, 205, 17-25.
• 23.Giesy J. P., Hilscherova K., Jones P. D., Kannan K., Machala M.: Cell bioassays for detection of aryl hydrocarbon (AhR) and estrogen receptor (ER) mediated activity in environmental samples. Marine Pollution Bull. 2002, 45, 3-16.
• 24.Gray L. E., Kelce W. R., Wiese T. et al.: Endocrine screening methods workshop report: detection of estrogenic and androgenic hormonal and antihormonal activity for chemicals that act via receptor or steroidogenic enzyme mechanisms. Reprod. Toxicol. 1997, 11, 719-750.
• 25.Gray L. E. Jr., Foster P. M. D.: Significance of experimental studies for assessing adverse effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Pure Appl. Chem. 2003, 75, 2125-2141.
• 26.Greim H.: Endpoints and surrogates for use in population studies in toxicology. Toxicol. Lett. 2001, 120, 395-403.
• 27.Groten J. P., Heijne W. H. M., Stierum R. H. Freidig A. P., Feron V.: Toxicology of chemical mixtures: a challenging quest along empirical sciences. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2004, 18, 185-192.
• 28.Harvey P. W., Everett D. J.: Regulation of endocrine-disrupting chemicals: Critical overview and deficiencies in toxicology and risk assessment for human health. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metabol. 2006, 20, 145-165.
• 29.Hendry W. J. III, Sheehan D. M., Khan S. A., May J. V.: Developing a laboratory animal model for perinatal endocrine disruption: the hamster chronicles. Exp. Biol. Med. 2002, 227, 709-723.
• 30.Holland P. T.: Analysis of endocrine active substances in food and the environment. Pure Appl. Chem. 2003, 75, 1843-1857.
• 31.Horoszewicz J. S., Leong S. S., Chu T. M., Wajsman Z. L., Friedman M., Papsidero L., Kim U., Chai L. S., Kakati S., Arya S. K., Sandberg A. A.: The LNCaP cell line a new model for studies on human prostatic carcinoma. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 1980, 37, 115-132.
• 32.Huet M.-C.: OECD Activity on endocrine disrupters test guidelines development. Ecotoxicology 2000, 9, 77-84.
• 33.Hutchinson T. H., Ankley G. T., Segner H., Tyler C. R.: Screening and testing for endocrine disruption in fish - biomarkers as "signposts" not "traffic lights" in risk assessment. Environ. Health Perspect. 2006, 114, 106-114.
• 34.Jacobs M. N.: In silico tools to aid risk assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Toxicology 2004, 205, 43-53.
• 35.Janosek J., Hilscherová, Bláha L., Holoubek I.: Environmental xenobiotics and nuclear receptors- Interactions, effects and in vitro assessment. Toxicol. in Vitro 2006, 20, 18-37.
• 36.Jones P. D., De Coen W. M., Tremblay L., Giesy J. P.: Vitellogenin as a biomarker for environmental estrogens. Water Sci. Technol. 2000, 42, 1-14.
• 37.Kortenkamp A.: Ten years of mixing coctails: a review of combination effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Environ. Health Perspect. 2007, 115, 98-105.
• 38.Martin O. V., Lester J. N., Voulvoulis N., Boobis A. R.: Human health and endocrine disruption: a simple multicriteria frame work for qualitative assessment of end point-specific risks in context of scientific uncertainty. Toxicol. Sci. 2007, 98, 332-347.
• 39.Mendes J. J. A.: The endocrine disrupters: a major medical challenge. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2002, 40, 781-788.
• 40.Minta M., Stypuła-Trębas S.: Związki hormonalnie aktywne w środowisku a zagrożenia zdrowia publicznego. Medycyna Wet. 2010, 66, 525-529.
• 41.Monosson E.: Chemical mixtures: considering the evolution of toxicology and chemical assessment. Environ. Health Perspect. 2005, 113, 383-390.
• 42.Mueller S. O.: Overview of in vitro tools to assess the estrogenic and antiestrogenic activity of phytoestrogens. J. Chromatogr. B 2002, 777, 155-165.
• 43.Rosselli M., Reinhart K., Imthurn B., Keller P. J., Dubey R. K.: Cellular and biochemical mechanisms by which environmental oestrogens influence reproductive function. Hum. Reprod. Update 2000, 6, 332-350.
• 44.Roy P., Alevizaki M., Huhtaniemi I.: In vitro bioassays for androgens and their diagnostic applications Hum. Reprod. Update 2008, 14, 73-82.
• 45.Saarinen N. M., Lorenzetti B. S., Mortensen A., Mäkelä S., Penttinen P., Sørensen I. K., Valsta L. M., Virgili F., Vollmer G., Wärri I. A., Zierau O.: Tools to evaluate estrogenic potency of dietary phytoestrogens: a consensus paper from the EU thematic network „Ohytohelth” (QLKI-2002-2453). Genes Nutr. 2006, 1, 143-158.
• 46.Sanseverino J., Elridge M. L., Layton A. C., Easter J. P., Yarboriugh J., Schultz T. W., Sayler G. S.: Screening of potentially hormonally active chemicals using bioluminescent yeast bioreporters. Toxicol. Sci. 2009, 107, 122-134.
• 47.Setzer R. W. Jr., Kimmel C. A.: Use of NOAEL, benchmark dose, and other models for human risk assessment of hormonally active substances. Pure Appl. Chem. 2003, 75, 2151-2158.
• 48.Silva E., Rajapakse N., Kortenkamp A.: Something from "nothing" - eight weak estrogenic chemicals combined at concentrations below NOECs significant mixture effects. Environ. Sci.Technol. 2002, 36, 1751-1756.
• 49.Soto A. M., Maffini M. V., Schaeberle C. M., Sonnenschein C.: Strengths and weaknesses of in vitro assays for estrogenic and androgenic activity. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metabol. 2006, 20, 15-33.
• 50.Spearow J. L., Barkley M.: Reassessment of models used to test xenobiotics for oestrogenic potency is overdue. Hum. Reprod. 2001, 16, 1027-1029.
• 51.Walker J. D.: Application of QSARs in toxicology: a US Government perspective. J. Molec. Struct. (Theochem) 2003, 622, 167-184.
• 52.Whyte J. J., Jung R. E., Schmitt C. J., Tillitt D. E.: Ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity in fish as a biomarker of chemical exposure. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2000, 30, 347-370.
• 53.Witters H. E., Vangenechten C., Berckmans P.: Detection of estrogenie activity in Flemish surface waters using an in vitro recombinant assay with yeast cells. Water Sci. Technol. 2001, 43, 117-123.