Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate-induced toxicity and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha: a review

The plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) has been widely used in the manufacture of polyvinyl chloride-containing products such as medical and consumer goods. Humans can easily be exposed to it because DEHP is ubiquitous in the environment. Recent research on the adverse effects of DEHP has focused on reproductive and developmental toxicity in rodents and/or humans. DEHP is a representative of the peroxisome proliferators. Therefore, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα)-dependent pathways are the expected mode of action of several kinds of DEHP-induced toxicities. In this review, we summarize DEHP kinetics and its mechanisms of carcinogenicity and reproductive and developmental toxicity in relation to PPARα. Additionally, we give an overview of the impacts of science policy on exposure sources.

Plasticizers May Activate Human Hepatic Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor α Less Than That of a Mouse but May Activate Constitutive Androstane Receptor in Liver

Dibutylphthalate (DBP), di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), and di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (DEHA) are used as plasticizers. Their metabolites activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) α, which may be related to their toxicities. However, species differences in the receptor functions between rodents and human make it difficult to precisely extrapolate their toxicity from animal studies to human. In this paper, we compared the species differences in the activation of mouse and human hepatic PPARα by these plasticizers using wild-type (mPPARα) and humanized PPARα (hPPARα) mice. At 12 weeks old, each genotyped male mouse was classified into three groups, and fed daily for 2 weeks per os with corn oil (vehicle control), 2.5 or 5.0 mmol/kg DBP (696, 1392 mg/kg), DEHP (977, 1953 mg/kg), and DEHA (926, 1853 mg/kg), respectively. Generally, hepatic PPARα of mPPARα mice was more strongly activated than that of hPPARα mice when several target genes involving β-oxidation of fatty acids were evaluated. Interestingly, all plasticizers also activated hepatic constitutive androstane receptor (CAR) more in hPPARα mice than in mPPARα mice. Taken together, these plasticizers activated mouse and human hepatic PPARα as well as CAR. The activation of PPARα was stronger in mPPARα mice than in hPPARα mice, while the opposite was true of CAR.

Risk assessment of oral exposure to diisononyl phthalate from children's products

Dialkyl phthalates are plasticizers used in household products made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Diisononyl phthalate (DINP) is the principal phthalate in soft plastic toys. Because DINP is not tightly bound to PVC, it may be released when children mouth PVC products. The potential chronic health risks of phthalate exposure to infants have been under scrutiny by regulatory agencies in Europe, Canada, Japan, and the U.S. This report describes a risk assessment of DINP exposure from children's products, by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) staff. This report includes the findings of a CPSC Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel (CHAP) which: (1) concluded that DINP is unlikely to present a human cancer hazard and (2) recommended an acceptable daily intake (ADI) level of 120 microg/kg-d, based on spongiosis hepatis in rats. The risk assessment incorporates new measurements of DINP migration rates from 24 toys and a new observational study of children's mouthing activities, with a detailed characterization of the objects mouthed. Probabilistic methods were used to estimate exposure. Mouthing behavior and, thus, exposure depend on the child's age. Approximately 42% of tested soft plastic toys contained DINP. Estimated DINP exposures for soft plastic toys were greatest among children 12-23 months old. The mean exposure for this age group was 0.08 (95% confidence interval 0.04-0.14) microg/kg-d, with a 99th percentile of 2.4 (1.3-3.2) microg/kg-d. The authors conclude that oral exposure to DINP from mouthing soft plastic toys is not likely to present a health hazard to children. The opinions expressed by the authors have not been reviewed or approved by, and do not necessarily reflect the views of, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Because this material was prepared by the authors in their official capacity, it is in the public domain and may be freely copied or reprinted.