Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

Background

Biomonitoring 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.

Objective

To 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).

Methods

A 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.

Results

Nineteen 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.

Conclusion

Results 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.

SUBMITTER: Yost EE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8596331 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiethyl phthalate (DEP) is widely used in many commercially available products including plastics and personal care products. DEP has generally not been found to share the antiandrogenic mode of action that is common among other types of phthalates, but there is emerging evidence that DEP may be associated with other types of health effects.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 DEP or its primary metabolite, monoethyl phthalate (MEP).MethodsA literature search was conducted in online scientific databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Toxline, Toxcenter) and Toxic Substances Control Act Submissions, augmented by review of online regulatory sources as well as forward and backward searches. Studies were selected for inclusion using 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.ResultsThirty-four experimental studies in animals were included in this analysis. Although no effects on androgen-dependent male reproductive development were observed following gestational exposure to DEP, there was evidence including effects on sperm following peripubertal and adult exposures, and the overall evidence for male reproductive effects was considered moderate. There was moderate evidence that DEP exposure can lead to developmental effects, with the major effect being reduced postnatal growth following gestational or early postnatal exposure; this generally occurred at doses associated with maternal effects, consistent with the observation that DEP is not a potent developmental toxicant. The evidence for liver effects was considered moderate based on consistent changes in relative liver weight at higher dose levels; histopathological and biochemical changes indicative of hepatic effects were also observed, but primarily in studies that had significant concerns for risk of bias and sensitivity. The evidence for female reproductive effects was considered slight based on few reports of statistically significant effects on maternal body weight gain, organ weight changes, and pregnancy outcomes. Evidence for cancer and effects on kidney were judged to be indeterminate based on limited evidence (i.e., a single two-year cancer bioassay) and inconsistent findings, respectively.ConclusionsThese results suggest that DEP exposure may induce androgen-independent male reproductive toxicity (i.e., sperm effects) as well as developmental toxicity and hepatic effects, with some evidence of female reproductive toxicity. More research is warranted to fully evaluate these outcomes and strengthen confidence in this database.

Project description:Cocktail effects and synergistic interactions of chemicals in mixtures are an area of great concern to both the public and regulatory authorities. The main concern is whether some chemicals can enhance the effect of other chemicals, so that they jointly exert a larger effect than predicted. This phenomenon is called synergy. Here we present a review of the scientific literature on three main groups of environmentally relevant chemical toxicants: pesticides, metal ions and antifouling compounds. The aim of the review is to determine 1) the frequency of synergy, 2) the extent of synergy, 3) whether any particular groups or classes of chemicals tend to induce synergy, and 4) which physiological mechanisms might be responsible for this synergy. Synergy is here defined as mixtures with minimum two-fold difference between observed and predicted effect concentrations using Concentration Addition (CA) as a reference model and including both lethal and sub-lethal endpoints. The results showed that synergy occurred in 7%, 3% and 26% of the 194, 21 and 136 binary pesticide, metal and antifoulants mixtures included in the data compilation on frequency. The difference between observed and predicted effect concentrations was rarely more than 10-fold. For pesticides, synergistic mixtures included cholinesterase inhibitors or azole fungicides in 95% of 69 described cases. Both groups of pesticides are known to interfere with metabolic degradation of other xenobiotics. For the four synergistic metal and 47 synergistic antifoulant mixtures the pattern in terms of chemical groups inducing synergy was less clear. Hypotheses in terms of mechanisms governing these interactions are discussed. It was concluded that true synergistic interactions between chemicals are rare and often occur at high concentrations. Addressing the cumulative rather than synergistic effect of co-occurring chemicals, using standard models as CA, is therefore regarded as the most important step in the risk assessment of chemical cocktails.

Project description:ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review of the epidemiology literature to identify the metabolic effects associated with phthalate exposure.Data sources and study eligibility criteriaSix phthalates were included in the review: di(2‑ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP), butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), and diethyl phthalate (DEP). The initial literature search (of PubMed, Web of Science, and Toxline) included all studies of metabolic effects in humans, and outcomes were selected for full systematic review based on data availability.Study evaluation and synthesis methodsStudies of diabetes and insulin resistance were evaluated using criteria defined a priori for risk of bias and sensitivity by two reviewers using a domain-based approach; studies identified with a pre-defined critical deficiency were excluded. Evidence was synthesized by outcome and phthalate and strength of evidence was summarized using a structured framework. Studies of obesity and renal effects received "screening level" reviews to determine whether full systematic review was warranted.ResultsThe primary outcomes reviewed here are (number of included/excluded studies in parentheses): type 2 diabetes (1/3), insulin resistance (13/3), and impaired glucose tolerance and blood glucose in pregnancy (4/2). For DEHP exposure, there was consistency among studies of insulin resistance and coherence with the single included study of diabetes, as well as an observed exposure-response gradient observed in a study of insulin resistance. This evidence is considered moderate. Similarly, for DBP and DIBP exposure, the evidence is considered moderate due to strong positive associations in the diabetes study and coherent results for insulin resistance. For DINP, BBP, and DEP, the evidence is considered slight. No association was reported in the single study of diabetes with BBP and DEP exposure (DINP was not investigated). The available evidence does indicate an association between exposure to these phthalates and insulin resistance, but the small number of studies and the lack of coherence with diabetes decreases confidence. The screening level reviews for obesity and renal effects determined that the currently available evidence is inadequate to assess the associations between these outcomes and phthalate exposure.Conclusions and implications of key findingsOverall, these results support that phthalate exposure at levels seen in human populations may have metabolic effects. Given the mechanistic support, the large effect sizes for incident diabetes in the single available study, and the coherence with insulin resistance, the association between phthalate exposure and diabetes risk should be considered when assessing the risks and costs of exposure to specific phthalates in humans. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. EPA.

Project description:ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review of the epidemiology literature to identify the neurodevelopmental effects associated with phthalate exposure.Data sources and study eligibility criteriaSix phthalates were included in the review: di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP), butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), and diethyl phthalate (DEP). The initial literature search (of PubMed, Web of Science, and Toxline) included all studies of neurodevelopmental effects in humans, and outcomes were selected for full systematic review based on data availability.Study evaluation and synthesis methodsStudies of neurodevelopmental effects were evaluated using criteria defined a priori for risk of bias and sensitivity by two reviewers using a domain-based approach. Evidence was synthesized by outcome and phthalate and strength of evidence was summarized using a structured framework. For studies of cognition and motor effects in children ≤4 years old, a random effects meta-analysis was performed.ResultsThe primary outcomes reviewed here are (number of studies in parentheses): cognition (14), motor effects (9), behavior, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (20), infant behavior (3), and social behavior, including autism spectrum disorder (7). For each phthalate/outcome combination, there was slight or indeterminate evidence of an association, with the exception of motor effects for BBP, which had moderate evidence.Conclusions and implications of key findingsOverall, there is not a clear pattern of association between prenatal phthalate exposures and neurodevelopment. There are several possible reasons for the observed null associations related to exposure misclassification, periods of heightened susceptibility, sex-specific effects, and the effects of phthalate mixtures. Until these limitations are adequately addressed in the epidemiology literature, these findings should not be interpreted as evidence that there are no neurodevelopmental effects of phthalate exposure. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. EPA.

Project description:ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review of the epidemiology literature to identify the male reproductive effects associated with phthalate exposure.Data sources and study eligibility criteriaSix phthalates were included in the review: di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP), butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), and diethyl phthalate (DEP). The initial literature search (of PubMed, Web of Science, and Toxline) included all studies of male reproductive effects in humans, and outcomes were selected for full systematic review based on data availability.Study evaluation and synthesis methodsFor each outcome, studies were evaluated using criteria defined a priori for risk of bias and sensitivity by two reviewers using a domain-based approach. Evidence was synthesized by outcome and phthalate and strength of evidence was summarized using a structured framework.ResultsThe primary outcomes reviewed here are (number of included/excluded studies in parentheses): anogenital distance (6/1), semen parameters (15/9), time to pregnancy (3/5), testosterone (13/8), timing of pubertal development (5/15), and hypospadias/cryptorchidism (4/10). Looking at the overall hazard, there was robust evidence of an association between DEHP and DBP exposure and male reproductive outcomes; this was based primarily on studies of anogenital distance, semen parameters, and testosterone for DEHP and semen parameters and time to pregnancy for DBP. There was moderate evidence of an association between DINP and BBP exposure and male reproductive outcomes based on testosterone and semen parameters for DINP and semen parameters and time to pregnancy for BBP. DIBP and DEP were considered to have slight evidence of an association. For DIBP, the less conclusive evidence was attributed to a more limited literature base (i.e., fewer studies) and lower exposure levels in the population, decreasing the ability to observe an effect. For DEP, the findings were consistent with experimental animal data that suggest DEP does not haves as strong an anti-androgenic effect as other phthalates.Conclusions and implications of key findingsOverall, despite some inconsistencies across phthalates in the specific outcomes associated with exposure, these results support that phthalate exposure at levels seen in human populations may have male reproductive effects, particularly DEHP and DBP. The relative strength of the evidence reflects differing levels of toxicity as well as differences in the range of exposures studied and the number of available studies. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. EPA.