A curated database of rodent uterotrophic bioactivity

Environmental Health Perspectives

Volumn 124, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 556-562

  Kleinstreuer, Nicole C ^a   Ceger, Patricia C ^a   Allen, David G ^a   Strickland, Judy ^a   Chang, Xiaoqing ^a   Hamm, Jonathan T ^a   Casey, Warren M ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; ESTROGEN;

DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; IN VITRO STUDY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; NONHUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POLLUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; UTEROTROPHIC BIOASSAY; UTERUS WEIGHT; WEIGHT CHANGE; ANIMAL; BIOASSAY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECTS; FEMALE; METABOLISM; RAT; TOXICITY TESTING; UTERUS;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL ASSAY; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; ESTROGENS; FEMALE; IN VITRO TECHNIQUES; RATS; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN; TOXICITY TESTS; UTERUS;

EID: 84964891591     PISSN: 00916765     EISSN: 15529924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1510183     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. An BS, Kang SK, Shin JH, Jeung EB. 2002. Stimulation of calbindin-D9k mRNA expression in the rat uterus by octyl-phenol, nonylphenol and bisphenol. Mol Cell Endocrinol 191:177-186.
2. Ashby J, Odum J. 2004. Gene expression changes in the immature rat uterus: effects of uterotrophic and sub-uterotrophic doses of bisphenol A. Toxicol Sci 82:458-467.
3. Billon-Galés A, Krust A, Fontaine C, Abot A, Flouriot G, Toutain C, et al. 2011. Activation function 2 (AF2) of estrogen receptor-α is required for the athero-protective action of estradiol but not to accelerate endothelial healing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:13311-13316.
4. Browne P, Judson RS, Casey WM, Kleinstreuer NC, Thomas RS. 2015. Screening chemicals for estrogen receptor bioactivity using a computational model. Environ Sci Technol 49:8804-8814.
5. Chang X, Kleinstreuer N, Ceger P, Hsieh JH, Allen D, Casey W. 2014. Application of reverse dosimetry to compare in vitro and in vivo estrogen receptor activity. Appl In Vitro Toxicol 1:33-44.
6. Christian MS, Hoberman AM, Bachmann S, Hellwig J. 1998. Variability in the uterotrophic response assay (an in vivo estrogenic response assay) in untreated control and positive control (DES-DP, 2.5 microG/kg, bid) Wistar and Sprague-Dawley rats. Drug Chem Toxicol 21(suppl 1):51-100.
7. Ding D, Xu L, Fang H, Hong H, Perkins R, Harris S, et al. 2010. The EDKB: an established knowledge base for endocrine disrupting chemicals. BMC Bioinformatics 11(suppl 6):S5, doi:10.1186/1471-2105-11-S6-S5.
8. Dix DJ, Houck KA, Martin MT, Richard AM, Setzer RW, Kavlock RJ. 2007. The ToxCast program for priori-tizing toxicity testing of environmental chemicals. Toxicol Sci 95:5-12.
9. Hartung T. 2009. Toxicology for the twenty-first century. Nature 460:208-212.
10. Hossaini A, Larsen JJ, Larsen JC. 2000. Lack of oestro-genic effects of food preservatives (parabens) in uterotrophic assays. Food Chem Toxicol 38:319-323.
11. ICCVAM (Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods) Authorization Act of 2000. 2000. Public Law 106-545.
12. ICCVAM, NICEATM (National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods), NIEHS (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences). 2011. ICCVAM Test Method Evaluation Report: The LUMI-CELL® ER (BG1Luc ER TA) Test Method: An in Vitro Assay for Identifying Human Estrogen Receptor Agonist and Antagonist Activity of Chemicals. NIH Publication No. 11-7850. Available: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/iccvam/docs/endo_docs/erta-tmer/bg1lucer-ta-tmer-combined.pdf [accessed 1 May 2015].
13. Judson RS, Houck KA, Kavlock RJ, Knudsen TB, Martin MT, Mortensen HM, et al. 2010. In vitro screening of environmental chemicals for targeted testing prioritization: the ToxCast project. Environ Health Perspect 118:485-492, doi:10.1289/ehp.0901392.
14. Judson RS, Magpantay FM, Chickarmane V, Haskell C, Tania N, Taylor J, et al. 2015. Integrated model of chemical perturbations of a biological pathway using 18 in vitro high throughput screening assays for the estrogen receptor. Toxicol Sci 148:137-154.
15. Judson R, Richard A, Dix D, Houck K, Elloumi F, Martin M, et al. 2008. ACToR—Aggregated Computational Toxicology Resource. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 233:7-13.
16. Kanno J, Onyon L, Haseman J, Fenner-Crisp P, Ashby J, Owens W, et al. 2001. The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay to screen compounds for in vivo estrogenic responses: phase 1. Environ Health Perspect 109:785-794.
17. Kanno J, Onyon L, Peddada S, Ashby J, Jacob E, Owens W. 2003. The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay. Phase 2: dose-response studies. Environ Health Perspect 111:1530-1549, doi:10.1289/ehp.5780.
18. Kavlock R, Chandler K, Houck K, Hunter S, Judson R, Kleinstreuer N, et al. 2012. Update on EPA’s ToxCast program: providing high throughput decision support tools for chemical risk management. Chem Res Toxicol 25:1287-1302.
19. Kim HS, Kang TS, Kang IH, Kim TS, Moon HJ, Kim IY, et al. 2005. Validation study of OECD rodent utero-trophic assay for the assessment of estrogenic activity in Sprague-Dawley immature female rats. J Toxicol Environ Health A 68:2249-2262.
20. Mirkin S, Pickar JH. 2015. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMS): a review of clinical data. Maturitas 80:52-57.
21. Odum J, Lefevre PA, Tinwell H, Van Miller JP, Joiner RL, Chapin RE, et al. 2002. Comparison of the developmental and reproductive toxicity of diethylstilbestrol administered to rats in utero, lactationally, preweaning, or postweaning. Toxicol Sci 68:147-163.
22. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2004. Test No. 440. Uterotrophic Bioassay in Rodents: A Short-Term Screening Test for Oestrogenic Properties. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4: Health Effects. Available: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/test-no-440-uterotrophic-bioassay-in-rodents_9789264067417-en [accessed 1 May 2015].
23. OECD. 2007. Series on Testing and Assessment. Number 67. Report of the Validation of the Uterotrophic Bioassay: Additional Data Supporting the Test Guideline on the Uterotrophic Bioassay in Rodents. Available: http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/displaydocument/?cote=env/jm/mono(2007)19&doclanguage=en [accessed 1 May 2015].
24. OECD. 2012. Test No. 455: Performance-based Test Guideline for Stably Transfected Transactivation in Vitro Assays to Detect Estrogen Receptor Agonists and Antagonists. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4: Health Effects. Available: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/test-no-455-draft-performance-based-test-guideline-for-stably-transfected-transactivation-in-vitro-assays-to-detect-estrogen-receptor-agonists-and-antagonists_9789264243040-en [accessed 1 May 2015].
25. Ohta R, Takagi A, Ohmukai H, Marumo H, Ono A, Matsushima Y, et al. 2012. Ovariectomized mouse uterotrophic assay of 36 chemicals. J Toxicol Sci 37:879-889.
26. Owens W, Koëter HB. 2003. The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay: an overview. Environ Health Perspect 111:1527-1529, doi:10.1289/ehp.6413.
27. Rotroff DM, Martin MT, Dix DJ, Filer DL, Houck KA, Knudsen TB, et al. 2014. Predictive endocrine testing in the 21st century using in vitro assays of estrogen receptor signaling responses. Environ Sci Technol 48:8706-8716.
28. Takeyoshi M. 2006. Draft Report of Pre-validation and Inter-laboratory Validation for Stably Transfected Transcriptional Activation (TA) Assay to Detect Estrogenic Activity. The Human Estrogen Receptor Alpha Mediated Reporter Gene Assay using hER-HeLa-9903 Cell Line. Ver.2006.Oct.06. Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute (CERI), Japan. Available: http://www.Oecd.Org/chemicalsafety/testing/37504278.Pdf [accessed 1 May 2015].
29. Tice RR, Austin CP, Kavlock RJ, Bucher JR. 2013. Improving the human hazard characterization of chemicals: a Tox21 update. Environ Health Perspect 121:756-765, doi:10.1289/ehp.1205784.
30. Tinwell H, Ashby J. 2004. Sensitivity of the immature rat uterotrophic assay to mixtures of estrogens. Environ Health Perspect 112:575-582, doi:10.1289/ehp.6831.
31. Tinwell H, Joiner R, Pate I, Soames A, Foster J, Ashby J. 2000. Uterotrophic activity of bisphenol A in the immature mouse. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 32:118-126.
32. U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2011a. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program for the 21st Century: (EDSP21 Work Plan). The Incorporation of in Silico Models and in Vitro High Throughput Assays in the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) for Prioritization and Screening. Summary Overview. A Part of the EDSP Comprehensive Management Plan. Washington, DC:U.S. EPA, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Available: http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ files/2015-07/documents/edsp21_work_plan_summary_overview_final.pdf [accessed 1 May 2015].
33. U.S. EPA. 2011b. Standard Evaluation Procedure (SEP). Uterotrophic Assay OCSPP Guideline 890.1600. Available: http://www.epa.gov/sites/ production/files/2015-07/documents/final_890.1600_uterotrophic_assay_sep_9.22.11.pdf [accessed 24 March 2016].
34. U.S. EPA. 2012. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Universe of Chemicals and General Validation Principles. Available: https://www.epa.gov/endocrine-disruption/endocrine-disruptor-screening-program-edsp-universe-chemicals-and-general [accessed 24 March 2016].
35. Wetmore BA. 2015. Quantitative in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation in a high-throughput environment. Toxicology 332:94-101.
36. Wetmore BA, Wambaugh JF, Ferguson SS, Sochaski MA, Rotroff DM, Freeman K, et al. 2012. Integration of dosimetry, exposure, and high-throughput screening data in chemical toxicity assessment. Toxicol Sci 125:157-174.