ArticleScientific reports2025
Oxidative stress, apoptosis and proliferation in uterus of piglets fed by sow or formula after ex vivo endocrine compound exposure.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Endocrine-active compounds (EACs) derived from anthropogenic activities and bioactive components in maternal milk influence neonatal development, a critical period for postnatal uterine morphogenesis. Here, using an ex vivo model, we investigated whether neonatal exposure to the antiandrogen 2-hydroxyflutamide, the environmental estrogen 4-tert-octylphenol, and the organochlorine insecticide metabolite HPTE (which exhibits estrogenic, antiestrogenic, and/or antiandrogenic activity) induces oxidative stress and alters proliferation and apoptosis in uterine explants from 10-day-old piglets. Additionally, we assessed whether natural feeding provides protection against the adverse effects of EACs. We found that EACs disrupting androgen or estrogen signaling increased ROS/RNS production, enhanced specific antioxidant enzyme activity, and/or induced apoptosis exclusively in sow-fed piglets, suggesting a compensatory mechanism to maintain cellular homeostasis. Its absence in formula-fed piglets may indicate a reduced capacity to activate protective mechanisms against EACs, potentially due to delayed development. In contrast, EAC-induced alterations in uterine cell proliferation occurred in both feeding groups in a cell type- and feeding-dependent manner. These findings suggest that natural feeding does not fully protect against EAC-induced uterine development disruption, which may have long-term reproductive consequences. Moreover, they reinforce the notion that the neonatal period is a critical window of uterine development, highly sensitive to endocrine disruptors.
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.