Carcinogenesis and Its Modification by Environmental Endocrine Disruptors: In Vivo Experimental and Epidemiological Findings

Abstract

Although a great deal of concern has been raised about the hazard potential of endocrine disruptors present in the environment, the in vivo data available from both experimental and epidemiological studies suggest that the majority of those agents do not pose a risk with regard to cancer development. Indeed, naturally occurring examples such as isoflavonoids even appear to exert protective effects. Only for xenobiotics such as 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethane (DDT), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and tetrachloro-p-dioxin (TCDD) and special cases of phenols and phthalates is there unequivocal evidence of carcinogenicity and this appears to be directly linked to their toxicity. Thus, careful in vivo assessment is required before drawing any conclusions regarding agents capable of affecting the mammalian endocrine system.

Organochlorine pesticides and prostate cancer, Is there an association? A meta-analysis of epidemiological evidence

“…All the previous mechanisms provide biological plausibility of the studied association; however, their relevance and applicability to carcinogenicity in humans is unknown [16,17]. Moreover, we observed that specific effects on PC cells have been rarely reported.…”

“…Interference with endogenous estrogenic or androgenic pathways as agonists or antagonists has been proposed [15]. However, some authors questioned the association between endocrine disrupting compounds and carcinogenesis due to the limited available supporting evidence [16,17].…”

Di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate and Deep Venous Thrombosis in Children: A Clinical and Experimental Analysis

“…26 Because phthalates are not covalently bound, they passively leak from the plastic matrix influenced by factors like temperature, exercised pressure, and storage time. [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] This leakage is influenced by contact with fluids and by flow rates, and there is documented interaction with body fluids like blood, mucus, and saliva, [14][15][16][17][18][19]22,35 hence, the ban for DEHP plasticized toys that can be chewed on and put in a child's mouth. Remarkably however, and despite this evidence, there is no such ban for the use of DEHP-softened PVC medical devices, which are also put into children's mouths or even beyond.…”

“…28 This overall relationship among blood and biomaterials may explain the sudden occurrence of catheter-related DVT in the 5 patients of the PICU or the sharp increase of CR-DVT incidence in the hospital in 2001. Furthermore, DEHP and its metabolites are known endocrine disruptors modifying carcinogenesis in rats and mice 19,24,36,37 and are genotoxic to human lymphocytes and human mucosal cells. 38 DEHP and its metabolites are also known xenobiotics mimicking or antagonizing sex hormones, hence their established reprotoxicity.…”

“…38 DEHP and its metabolites are also known xenobiotics mimicking or antagonizing sex hormones, hence their established reprotoxicity. 19,[39][40][41][42][43][44] It is also remarkable that since plasticized products became ubiquitous in the developed world, asthma and allergies evolved to the status of major health care problems. Evidence now reveals that, besides lifestyle and demographic factors, asthma and certain allergies can reflect a biological response to phthalates and especially DEHP.…”