Development of a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of diisononyl phthalate (DiNP) in pregnant rat and human

A review of common non-ortho-phthalate plasticizers for use in food contact materials

Several non-ortho phthalate plasticizers, including ATBC, DEHA, DINCH, DOTP, and ESBO, are currently used in flexible PVC applications for food packaging and processing. The aim of this review is to summarize the available toxicity, migration, and human biomonitoring data. Available assessments from US CPSC, EFSA, other governmental and non-governmental organizations, and published toxicology studies were used to show that these plasticizers are generally well-studied and demonstrate low toxicity with a focus on potential carcinogenicity, reproductive, developmental, and endocrine related adverse effects as well as biodegradation, aquatic toxicity, and bioaccumulation. Seven other plasticizers, 2EHESBO, ASE, CMCHA, DBT, DEHCH, PETV, and TOTM, have at least some recent but limited food contact clearances; assessments from CPSC, EFSA, and robust summaries in the REACH dossiers were reviewed for these products. Data gaps were found for some of these products; however, there were no concerns raised by the existing data, and they for now have limited use in food contact applications. Migration of ASE, COMGHA, DINCH, DOTP, DEHCH, and TOTM in simulants for aqueous and low alcohol foods ranged from <0.02 to 0.165 mg/kg, which showed they are below established migration limits and well-suited for these applications. Human biomonitoring data are available for DINCH, DOTP, DEHA, DINA, and TOTM, and are essential for determining exposure from all uses.

Exposure to Dibutyl Phthalate and Reproductive-Related Outcomes in Animal Models: Evidence From Rodents Study

Background: Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) was an endocrine disruptor, which may lead to cancer and affects reproductive function when accumulated in the body. But the precise role of DBP in the reproductive system remained controversial.

Objective: We employed the meta-analysis to explore the relationship between DBP and reproductive-related outcomes.

Methods: We searched relevant literature in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases. The standardized mean differences (SMDs) and their 95% CIs were measured by random-effects models. Funnel plots and Egger’s regression test were applied to assess publication bias.

Results: Finally, 19 literatures were included in this research. The outcomes revealed that DBP was negatively correlated with reproductive organs weight (testis weight: SMD: −0.59; 95% Cl: −1.23, −0.23; seminal vesicles weight: SMD: −0.74; 95% Cl: −1.21, −0.27; prostate weight: SMD: −0.46; 95% Cl: −0.76, −0.16) and sperm parameters (sperm morphology: SMD: 1.29; 95% Cl: 0.63, 1.94; sperm count: SMD: −1.81; 95% Cl: −2.39, −1.23; sperm motility: SMD: −1.92; 95% Cl: −2.62, −1.23).

Conclusion: Our research demonstrated that DBP may be negatively associated with reproductive-related indicators, especially at Gestation exposure period and middle dose (100–500 mg/kg/day).

Phthalates and Alternative Plasticizers Differentially affect Phenotypic Parameters in Gonadal Somatic and Germ Cell Lines

The developmental and reproductive toxicity associated with exposure to phthalates has motivated a search for alternatives. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the adverse effects of some of these chemicals. We used high-content imaging to compare the effects of mono (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP) with six alternative plasticizers: di-2-ethylhexyl terephthalate (DEHTP); diisononyl-phthalate (DINP); di-isononylcyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylate (DINCH); 2-ethylhexyl adipate (DEHA); 2,2,4-trimethyl 1,3-pentanediol diisobutyrate (TXIB) and di-iso-decyl-adipate (DIDA). A male germ spermatogonial cell line (C18-4), a Sertoli cell line (TM4) and two steroidogenic cell lines (MA-10 Leydig and KGN granulosa) were exposed for 48h to each chemical (0.001-100 μM). Cell images were analyzed to assess cytotoxicity and effects on phenotypic endpoints. Only MEHP (100 μM) was cytotoxic and only in C18-4 cells. However, several plasticizers had distinct phenotypic effects in all four cell lines. DINP increased Calcein intensity in C18-4 cells, whereas DIDA induced oxidative stress. In TM4 cells, MEHP, and DINCH affected lipid droplet numbers, while DEHTP and DINCH increased oxidative stress. In MA-10 cells, MEHP increased lipid droplet areas and oxidative stress; DINP decreased the number of lysosomes, while DINP, DEHA and DIDA altered mitochondrial activity. In KGN cells, MEHP, DINP and DINCH increased the number of lipid droplets, whereas DINP decreased the number of lysosomes, increased oxidative stress and affected mitochondria. The Toxicological Priority Index (ToxPi) provided a visual illustration of the cell line specificity of the effects on phenotypic parameters. The lowest administered equivalent doses were observed for MEHP. We propose that this approach may assist in screening alternative plasticizers.

An integrated exposure and pharmacokinetic modeling framework for assessing population-scale risks of phthalates and their substitutes

To effectively incorporate in vitro-in silico-based methods into the regulation of consumer product safety, a quantitative connection between product phthalate concentrations and in vitro bioactivity data must be established for the general population. We developed, evaluated, and demonstrated a modeling framework that integrates exposure and pharmacokinetic models to convert product phthalate concentrations into population-scale risks for phthalates and their substitutes. A probabilistic exposure model was developed to generate the distribution of multi-route exposures based on product phthalate concentrations, chemical properties, and human activities. Pharmacokinetic models were developed to simulate population toxicokinetics using Bayesian analysis via the Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Both exposure and pharmacokinetic models demonstrated good predictive capability when compared with worldwide studies. The distributions of exposures and pharmacokinetics were integrated to predict the population distributions of internal dosimetry. The predicted distributions showed reasonable agreement with the U.S. biomonitoring surveys of urinary metabolites. The "source-to-outcome" local sensitivity analysis revealed that food contact materials had the greatest impact on body burden for di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA), di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), di(isononyl) cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylate (DINCH), and di(2-propylheptyl) phthalate (DPHP), whereas the body burden of diethyl phthalate (DEP) was most sensitive to the concentration in personal care products. The upper bounds of predicted plasma concentrations showed no overlap with ToxCast in vitro bioactivity values. Compared with the in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) approach, the integrated modeling framework has significant advantages in mapping product phthalate concentrations to multi-route risks, and thus is of great significance for regulatory use with a relatively low input requirement. Further integration with new approach methodologies will facilitate these in vitro-in silico-based risk assessments for a broad range of products containing an equally broad range of chemicals.

Using quantitative modeling tools to assess pharmacokinetic bias in epidemiological studies showing associations between biomarkers and health outcomes at low exposures

Biomarkers of exposure can be measured at lower and lower levels due to advances in analytical chemistry. Using these sensitive methods, some epidemiology studies report associations between biomarkers and health outcomes at biomarker levels much below those associated with effects in animal studies. While some of these low exposure associations may arise from increased sensitivity of humans compared with animals or from species-specific responses, toxicology studies with drugs, commodity chemicals and consumer products have not generally indicated significantly greater sensitivity of humans compared with test animals for most health outcomes. In some cases, these associations may be indicative of pharmacokinetic (PK) bias, i.e., a situation where a confounding factor or the health outcome itself alters pharmacokinetic processes affecting biomarker levels. Quantitative assessment of PK bias combines PK modeling and statistical methods describing outcomes across large numbers of individuals in simulated populations. Here, we first provide background on the types of PK models that can be used for assessing biomarker levels in human population and then outline a process for considering PK bias in studies intended to assess associations between biomarkers and health outcomes at low levels of exposure. After providing this background, we work through published examples where these PK methods have been applied with several chemicals/chemical classes - polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), polybrominated biphenyl ethers (PBDE) and phthalates - to assess the possibility of PK bias. Studies of the health effects of low levels of exposure will be improved by developing some confidence that PK bias did not play significant roles in the observed associations.

Systematic comparison of the male reproductive tract in fetal and adult Wistar rats exposed to DBP and DINP in utero during the masculinisation programming window

This study investigates possible effects of in utero exposure of rats to a low dose (125 mg/kg bw/day) and a high dose (750 mg/kg bw/day) of Diisononyl phthalate (DINP) during the masculinisation programming window (MPW) which is embryonic days 15.5-18.5 (e15.5 - e18.5). Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) was used at a high dose level (750 mg/kg bw/day) as an established positive control substance for anti-androgenic effects on the developing male reproductive tract. We focussed on the MPW and measured a multitude of biological endpoints at various life stages and applied state of the art histopathology staining techniques to refine the characterization of potential changes to the testis, beyond what is currently available with DINP. If DINP can mediate testicular dysgenesis (TDS) disorders, this exposure window would be sufficient to induce androgen impacts and alter male reproductive tract development as shown earlier in this validated experimental model with DBP. Overall, the results of this systematic comparison provide convincing evidence on the differences between the effects occurring with DBP and DINP. In contrast to what was seen with DBP, DINP did not cause cryptorchidism or hypospadias, had no effect on anogenital distance/anogenital index (AGD/AGi) and Leydig cell aggregates on e17.5 and e21.5 did not increase. With DINP no reduction of intratesticular testosterone, no effects on sperm motility and sperm count and no effect on adult testosterone or luteinizing hormone (LH) levels were seen. Our results demonstrate that DINP does not cause the adverse reproductive effects known to occur with DBP, a well-established endocrine disruptor.