4.5 Article

Gestational PFOA exposure of mice is associated with altered mammary gland development in dams and female offspring

期刊

TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 96, 期 1, 页码 133-144

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfl177

关键词

mammary gland; PFOA; lactation; development; pregnancy

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [5-T32ES001726-22] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), with diverse and widespread commercial and industrial applications, has been detected in human and wildlife sera. Previous mouse studies linked prenatal PFOA exposure to decreased neonatal body weights (BWs) and survival in a dose-dependent manner. To determine whether effects were linked to gestational time of exposure or to subsequent lactational changes, timed-pregnant CD-1 mice were orally dosed with 5 mg PFOA/kg on gestation days (GD) 1-17, 8-17, 12-17, or vehicle on GD 1-17. PFOA exposure had no effect on maternal weight gain or number of live pups born. Mean pup BWs on postnatal day (PND) 1 in all PFOA-exposed groups were significantly reduced and decrements persisted until weaning. Mammary glands from lactating dams and female pups on PND 10 and 20 were scored based on differentiation or developmental stages. A significant reduction in mammary differentiation among dams exposed GD 1-17 or 8-17 was evident on PND 10. On PND 20, delays in normal epithelial involution and alterations in milk protein gene expression were observed. All exposed female pups displayed stunted mammary epithelial branching and growth at PND 10 and 20. While control litters at PND 10 and 20 had average scores of 3.1 and 3.3, respectively, all treated litters had scores of 1.7 or less, with no progression of duct epithelial growth evident over time. BW was an insignificant covariate for these effects. These findings suggest that in addition to gestational exposure, abnormal lactational development of dams may play a role in early growth retardation of developmentally exposed offspring.

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

4.5
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