4.8 Review

Review on crosstalk and common mechanisms of endocrine disruptors: Scaffolding to improve PBPK/PD model of EDC mixture

期刊

ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL
卷 99, 期 -, 页码 1-14

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.016

关键词

Endocrine disruptor compounds (EDCs); Toxicity mechanism; Mixture interaction; Common mechanism; Crosstalk; PBPIC/PD models

资金

  1. FP7 Programme [603946]
  2. Horizon Framework Programme [633172]
  3. Universitat Rovira I Virgili under Marti-Franques Research Grants Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endocrine disruptor compounds (EDCs) are environment chemicals that cause harmful effects through multiple mechanisms, interfering with hormone system resulting in alteration of homeostasis, reproduction and developmental effect. Many of these EDCs have concurrent exposure with crosstalk and common mechanisms which may lead to dynamic interactions. To carry out risk assessment of EDCs' mixture, it is important to know the detailed toxic pathway, crosstalk of receptor and other factors like critical window of exposure. In this review, we summarize the major mechanism of actions of EDCs with the different/same target organs interfering with the same/different class of hormone by altering their synthesis, metabolism, binding and cellular action. To show the impact of EDCs on life stage development, a case study on female fertility affecting germ cell is illustrated. Based on this summarized discussion, major groups of EDCs are classified based on their target organ, mode of action and potential risk. Finally, a conceptual model of pharmacodynamic interaction is proposed to integrate the crosstalk and common mechanisms that modulate estrogen into the predictive mixture dosimetry model with dynamic interaction of mixture. This review will provide new insight for EDCs' risk assessment and can be used to develop next generation PBPK/PD models for EDCs' mixture analysis. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据