Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24515841›Full record

ArticleBirth defects research. Part B, Developmental and reproductive toxicology2014

Key learnings from the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) Tier 1 rodent uterotrophic and Hershberger assays.

M Sue Marty, John C O'Connor

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Birth defects research. Part B, Developmental and reproductive toxicology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Development of a curated Hershberger database.Reproductive toxicology (Elmsford, N.Y.) · 2018
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M Sue MartyToxicology & Environmental Research and Consulting, The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, Michigan.
John C O'Connor
Dow Chemical (United States) · USDuPont (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2009, companies began screening compounds using the US Environmental Protection Agency's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). EDSP has two tiers: Tier 1 includes 11 assays to identify compounds with potential endocrine activity. This article describes two laboratories' experiences conducting Tier 1 uterotrophic and Hershberger assays. The uterotrophic assay detects estrogen receptor agonists through increases in uterine weight. The advantages of the uterotrophic rat models (immature vs. adult ovariectomized) and exposure routes are discussed. Across 29 studies, relative differences in uterine weights in the vehicle control group and 17α-ethynylestradiol-positive control group were reasonably reproducible. The Hershberger assay detects androgen receptor (AR) agonists, antagonists, and 5α-reductase inhibitors through changes in accessory sex tissue (AST) weights. Across 23 studies, AST weights were relatively reproducible for the vehicle groups (baseline), testosterone propionate (TP) groups (androgenic response), and flutamide + TP groups (antiandrogenic response). In one laboratory, one and four compounds were positive in the androgenic and antiandrogenic portions of the assay, respectively. Each compound was also positive for AR binding. In the other laboratory, three compounds showed potential antiandrogenic activity, but each compound was negative for AR binding and did not fit the profile for 5α-reductase inhibition. These compounds induced hepatic enzymes that enhanced testosterone metabolism/clearance, resulting in lower testosterone and decreased capacity to maintain AST weights. The Hershberger androgenic and antiandrogenic performance criteria were generally attainable. Overall, the uterotrophic and Hershberger assays were easily adopted and function as described for EDSP screening, although the mode of action for positive results may not be easily determined.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsBiological AssayEndocrine DisruptorsEndpoint DeterminationFemaleOrgan SizeRatsStatistics as TopicUterusEndocrine Disruptors5α-reductase inhibitorandrogenantiandrogenEDSPendocrine disruptorendocrine disruptor screening programendocrine screeningestrogenHershbergeruterotrophic

Identifiers

PMID24515841
PMCPMC4309517
OpenAlexW1502516894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.