Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30591249›Full record

SynthesisEnvironment international2019

Hazards of diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) exposure: A systematic review of animal toxicology studies.

Erin E Yost, Susan Y Euling, James A Weaver, Brandiese E J Beverly, Nagalakshmi Keshava, Anuradha Mudipalli, Xabier Arzuaga, Todd Blessinger, Laura Dishaw, Andrew Hotchkiss and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Environment international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 170 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Erin E YostU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America. Electronic address: Yost.Erin@epa.gov.
Susan Y EulingU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, United States of America.
James A WeaverU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America.
Brandiese E J BeverlyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America.
Nagalakshmi KeshavaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Anuradha MudipalliU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America.
Xabier ArzuagaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Todd BlessingerU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Laura DishawU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America.
Andrew HotchkissU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America.
Susan L MakrisU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Environmental Protection Agency · US

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomonitoring studies indicate a trend towards increased human exposure to diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP), a replacement for dibutyl phthalate (DBP). Recent reviews have found DIBP to be a male reproductive toxicant, but have not evaluated other hazards of DIBP exposure.

objectiveTo inform chemical risk assessment, we performed a systematic review to identify and characterize outcomes within six broad hazard categories (male reproductive, female reproductive, developmental, liver, kidney, and cancer) following exposure of nonhuman mammalian animals to DIBP or the primary metabolite, monoisobutyl phthalate (MIBP).

methodsA literature search was conducted in four online scientific databases [PubMed, Web of Science, Toxline, and Toxic Substances Control Act Test Submissions 2.0 (TSCATS2)], and augmented by review of regulatory sources as well as forward and backward searches. Studies were identified for inclusion based on defined PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparator, Outcome) criteria. Studies were evaluated using criteria defined a priori for reporting quality, risk of bias, and sensitivity using a domain-based approach. Evidence was synthesized by outcome and life stage of exposure, and strength of evidence was summarized into categories of robust, moderate, slight, indeterminate, or compelling evidence of no effect, using a structured framework.

resultsNineteen toxicological studies in rats or mice met the inclusion criteria. There was robust evidence that DIBP causes male reproductive toxicity. Male rats and mice exposed to DIBP during gestation had decreased testosterone and adverse effects on sperm or testicular histology, with additional phthalate syndrome effects observed in male rats. There was also evidence of androgen-dependent and -independent male reproductive effects in rats and mice following peripubertal or young adult exposure to DIBP or MIBP, but confidence was reduced because of concerns over risk of bias and sensitivity in the available studies. There was also robust evidence that DIBP causes developmental toxicity; specifically, increased post-implantation loss and decreased pre- and postnatal growth. For other hazards, evidence was limited by the small number of studies, experimental designs that were suboptimal for evaluating outcomes, and study evaluation concerns such as incomplete reporting of methods and results. There was slight evidence for female reproductive toxicity and effects on liver, and indeterminate evidence for effects on kidney and cancer.

conclusionResults support DIBP as a children's health concern and indicate that male reproductive and developmental toxicities are hazards of DIBP exposure, with some evidence for female reproductive and liver toxicity. Data gaps include the need for more studies on male reproductive effects following postnatal and adult exposure, and studies to characterize potential hormonal mechanisms in females.

Indexed as

AnimalsDibutyl PhthalateFemaleKidneyLiverMaleMiceNeoplasmsPhthalic AcidsRatsReproductionRisk AssessmentDibutyl Phthalatediisobutyl phthalatemono-isobutyl phthalatePhthalic Acids

Identifiers

PMID30591249
PMCPMC8596331
OpenAlexW2906535616

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.