ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2025
Deciphering per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances mode of action: comparative gene expression analysis in human liver spheroids.
Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration of mechanistic and repeat dose toxicity data in the derivation of an oral reference dose for HFPO-DA.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026Review
- Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Enhance Cholesterol Accumulation and Dysregulate Inflammatory Responses in Macrophages.Cardiovascular toxicology · 2025Article
- Identification of four mechanisms of toxicity for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances through transcriptomic profiling in human liver spheroids exposed to 24 PFAS.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding the mechanisms by which environmental chemicals cause toxicity is necessary for effective human health risk assessment. High-throughput transcriptomics (HTTr) can be used to inform risk assessment on toxicological mechanisms, hazards, and potencies. We applied HTTr to elucidate the molecular mechanisms by which per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) cause liver perturbations. We contrasted transcriptomic profiles of PFOA, PFBS, PFOS, and PFDS against transcriptomic profiles from established liver-toxic and non-toxic reference compounds, alongside peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) agonists. Our analysis was conducted on metabolically competent 3-D human liver spheroids produced from primary cells from 10 donors. Pathway analysis showed that PFOS and PFDS perturb many of the same pathways as the known liver-toxic compounds in the spheroids, and that the cholesterol biosynthesis pathways are significantly affected by exposure to these compounds. PFOA alters lipid metabolism-related pathways but its expression profile does not closely match reference compounds. PFBS upregulates many degradation-related pathways and targets many of the same pathways as the PPAR agonists and acetaminophen. Our transcriptional analysis does not support the claim that these PFAS are DNA-damaging in this model. A multidimensional scaling (MDS) analysis revealed that PFOS, PFOA, and PFDS cluster together in the same multidimensional space as liver-damaging compounds, whereas PFBS clusters more closely with the non-liver-damaging compounds. Benchmark concentration-response modeling predicts that all the PFAS are bioactive in the liver. Overall, our results show that these PFAS produce unique transcriptional changes but also alter pathways associated with established liver-toxic chemicals in this liver spheroid model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.