ReviewArchives of toxicology2026
Hepatotoxicity of chlorinated organophosphate flame retardants (Cl-OPFRs): a comprehensive review.
Review in Archives of toxicology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As the primary alternatives to brominated flame retardants, chlorinated organophosphorus flame retardants (Cl-OPFRs) have seen surging production and usage. Consequently, they are now widely distributed and persistent in indoor dust, air, water, and food. These pollutants accumulate in human samples and pose significant hazards to living organisms, with increasing evidence identifying the liver as the main target organ. This paper systematically summarises current progress regarding the absorption and metabolic fate of Cl-OPFRs and reviews their hepatic effects. We propose that Cl-OPFRs induce liver damage through multiple pathways: oxidative stress, inflammatory responses, lipid metabolism disruption, mitochondrial dysfunction, gut-liver axis disruption, cell cycle arrest, and apoptosis. Importantly, these mechanisms function synergistically rather than in isolation. Core drivers, particularly oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction, engage in complex interactions that form positive feedback loops, collectively amplifying liver injury. Despite these advances, current research is constrained by the discrepancy between high-dose experimental models and real-world exposures, as well as limited metabolite data. Future research should prioritise environmentally relevant chronic models and investigate non-apoptotic cell death (e.g., ferroptosis), sex-specific vulnerabilities, and metabolite toxicity. In conclusion, this review provides an outlook for future research and offers scientific evidence to support the rational application of Cl-OPFRs and the mitigation of their environmental health risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41838058What 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.