 |
NOTE: The following letter was published in the July 2004 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives. The citation is:
McKee, R. (2004). Phthalates and Early Thelarche. Environmental Health Perspectives 112:A541-543.
March 29, 2004
Richard H. McKee, Chairman, Toxicology Research Task Group, Phthalate Esters Panel, American Chemistry Council, 1300 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA. 22209
Editor
Environmental Health Perspectives
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Mail Drop EC-15
P.O. Box 12233
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
To The Editor:
Several years ago Colon et al. (2000) reported higher levels of phthalates, particularly di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) in serum from 41 girls experiencing premature breast development (thelarche) as compared to 35 age matched controls. These data seem puzzling for at least two reasons. First, in light of the pharmacokinetic properties of phthalates, the reported blood levels are very high when compared to more recent exposure information, and, second, toxicological evidence shows that phthalates do not act like estrogens under in vivo conditions, nor do they affect female sexual development and maturation in rodents. Despite these concerns, Colon et al. (2000) is one of the few studies that has compared chemical exposures to sexual development, and, as a consequence, it is now being cited by authors developing hypotheses for future research programs on children’s health (e.g., Chapin et al., 2003). There have been a number of recent scientific developments that relate to these matters. Thus, it seemed timely to summarize the exposure and toxicological information that would be relevant in assessing whether low level exposure to phthalates as might be experienced under typical ambient conditions could influence human female sexual development.
Colon et al. (2000) reported an average DEHP concentration of 450 ppb (ng/ml) DEHP and 3 ppb monoethylhexyl phthalate (MEHP, the first metabolite of DEHP) in serum samples from the referred cases. In comparison, they found 70 ppb DEHP in controls, while MEHP was below levels of detection. In general, the measurement of phthalates in biological fluids and other media can be quite problematic because of the potential for laboratory contamination due to the use of flexible vinyl in laboratory equipment and tubing. Also, the use of flexible vinyl in liners for reagent bottles is common (e.g., Kessler et al., 2001). Much of the historical data on phthalate levels is questionable, and investigators are now measuring phthalate metabolites in biological media as a way of avoiding the sample contamination problems (e.g., Blount et al., 2000a,b; Kessler et al., 2001). However, taking the data at face value, the results are difficult to rationalize with information on phthalate pharmacokinetics and exposure.
Within the population at large, the principal route of exposure to phthalates is via food (e.g., Clark et al., 2003). Ingested phthalates are converted to the corresponding monoesters before absorption (e.g., Kluwe, 1982), and blood levels of phthalate diesters are normally very low. To put this into perspective, a blood level of 450 ppb DEHP is approximately 1.2 uM. In a recent pharmacokinetic study of DEHP in the marmoset (Kessler et al., 2004), oral doses of DEHP at levels of 30 and 500 mg/kg resulted in peak blood levels of DEHP of 0.3 and 1.8 uM. Using a linear allometric extrapolation, an oral dose of approximately 300 mg/kg DEHP would be required to produce a blood level of 450 ppb. In contrast, the average DEHP exposure among U.S. children at ages similar to those examined by Colon et al. (2000) is 2.6 ug/kg/day (McKee et al., 2004, calculated from urinary metabolite data in Brock et al., 2003). Thus, the blood concentration data reported by Colon et al. (2000) are very unusual, and, if correct, imply extraordinary exposures by comparison to those of other children of similar ages.
Further, as indicated above, DEHP is rapidly metabolized to its corresponding monoester, mono-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP). In a pharmacokinetic study in marmosets (Kessler et al., 2004), oral doses of 30 and 500 mg/kg resulted in peak MEHP concentrations of 8 and 66 uM, approximately 20 times greater than the peak DEHP levels at equivalent doses. In contrast, the average MEHP level of 3 ppb reported by Colon et al. (2000) was more than two orders of magnitude below the reported average DEHP level. The only imaginable situation that might produce such anomalous results is if the blood samples had been taken immediately after direct introduction of DEHP into the blood stream. This is theoretically possible, but the reported levels still seem unlikely. The only way in which significant levels of un-metabolized phthalates may enter the blood stream is via the use of medical devices including blood bags, tubing, and other medical equipment (e.g., FDA, 2002). DEHP is the primary phthalate plasticizer for such vinyl medical devices. However, as shown in an assessment by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA, 2002), only critical care procedures could produce blood levels that begin to approach the levels reported by Colon et al (2000). Further, in blood DEHP is rapidly metabolized with a biological half time in humans of less than 6 hours (e.g., Peck and Albro, 1982). Thus, assuming medical treatment to be the explanation for the high DEHP/MEHP ratio reported by Colon et al. (2000), the measured blood levels imply intensive care procedures performed in the few hours proceeding the blood collection. However, given the circumstances this seems unlikely.
In the Colon study, the blood samples were taken from children after referral to pediatric clinics, i.e., after premature thelarche had been observed. Since phthalates are rapidly metabolized and excreted, the blood level data, if not the result of laboratory contamination, could only have reflected exposures occurring shortly before the blood was drawn. For the hypothesized link between phthalate exposure and early breast development to be supported, one would have to assume that these point estimates were indicative of a pattern of exposure that had persisted for an extended period of time. But, as shown above, the conditions leading to the reported blood levels are so unusual that they cannot reflect an extended exposure profile. Analytical difficulties seem a more likely explanation to reconcile the data reported by Colon et al. (2000) with the extensive body of information on phthalate pharmacokinetics.
The second general reason why an association between phthalate exposure and early onset of puberty in girls is puzzling and seems unlikely is that it is not supported by the toxicological data. There is a hypothesis that premature thelarche is a consequence of unintentional exposure to estrogen or estrogen-like substances (e.g., Li et al., 2002; Tiwary, 1998). It has been reported that some phthalates, although not DEHP, can bind and activate the estrogen receptor under in vitro conditions (e.g., Jobling et al., 1995; Soto et al., 1995); however, subsequent work has shown that this is an artifact of the testing conditions. As described above, under in vivo conditions the phthalates are rapidly metabolized to the corresponding monoesters, but these metabolites are not active under in vitro conditions (Brady et al., 1998; Harris et al., 1997; Picard et al., 2001). In rats and mice phthalates are inactive in uterotrophic assays and do not induce vaginal cornification (Kanno et al., 2003; Zacharewski et al., 1998). Similarly, in longer term studies phthalates do not influence age at vaginal patency or estrous cyclicity and do not otherwise influence sexual development or behavior in female rats (Moore, 2000). Some phthalates produce effects in male rats, apparently as a result of alterations in testosterone synthesis (Parks et al., 2000), but these alterations do not produce estrogen-like effects in female rats (Gray et al., 1998; Moore et al., 2001; Mylchreest et al., 1998; 1999). With respect to female reproductive development, the only effect that has been described in rats relates to histological changes in the ovary that occur at very high doses (Lovekamp and Davis, 2003; Lovekamp-Swan and Davis, 2003). These changes seem to be due to inhibition of aromatase activity in the granulosa cells. Aromatase inhibition reduces conversion of testosterone to estradiol and produces what is effectively an anti-estrogenic effect under these circumstances. However, this seems unlikely to have any public health implications, partly because the doses required in rodents are much higher than those to which humans are exposed, and also because the aromatase inhibition is dependent on activation of the peroxisome proliferator activated receptor. In other situations, there is evidence that PPAR?-dependent effects exhibit profound species-specificity with rodents being very sensitive and humans being much less sensitive if not refractory (e.g., Klaunig et al., 2003).
In summary, the purported relationship between phthalate exposure and early thelarche (Colon et al., 2000) seems highly unlikely, in part because the reported exposure levels do not seem plausible given other information on phthalate exposure and also because phthalates do not influence the timing of female sexual development in laboratory studies.
Sincerely,
Richard H. McKee
RHM:tlt
Blount B, Milgram K, Silva M, Malek N, Reidy J, Needham L, Brock J. 2000a. Quantitative detection of eight phthalate metabolites in human urine using HPLC-APCI-MS/MS. Analytical Chemistry 72: 4127-4134.
Blount B, Silva M, Caudill S, Needham L, Pirkle J, Sampson E, Lucier G, Jackson R, Brock J. 2000b. Levels of seven urinary phthalate metabolites in a human reference population. Environmental Health Perspectives 108:979-982.
Brady A, Moffat G, Martens M. 1998. Assessment of in vivo estrogenic activity of butylbenzyl phthalate (BBP) and its metabolites. Toxicological Sciences, 42 (1S), 176-177.
Brock J, Caudill S, Silva M, Needham L, Hilborn E. 2002. Phthalate monoester levels in young children. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 68:309-314.
Chapin R, Robbins W, Schieve L, Sweeney A, Tabacova S, Tomashek K. 2003. Off to a good start: The influence of pre- and peri-conceptual exposures, parental fertility, and nutrition on children’s health. Environmental Health Perspectives, online September, 2003.
Clark K, Cousins I, Mackay D. Assessment of Critical Exposure Pathways. 2003. In: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. III Part Q. Berlin: Springer - Verlag. P. 227-262.
Colon I, Caro D, Bourdony C, Rosario O. 2000. Identification of phthalate esters in the serum of young Puerto Rican girls with premature breast development. Environmental Health Perspectives 108: 895-900.
FDA. 2001. Safety assessment of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) released from PVC medical devices. Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 12709 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockville, MD 20852.
Gray L., Wolf C, Lambright C, Mann P, Price M, Cooper R, Ostby J. 1999. Administration of potentially antiandrogenic pesticides (procymidone, linuron, iprodione, chlozolinate, p,p’-DDE, and ketoconazole) and toxic substances (dibutyl- and diethylhexyl phthalate, PCB 169, and ethane dimethane suphonate) during sexual differentiation produces diverse profiles of reproductive malformations in the male rat. Toxicology and Industrial Health 15: 94-118.
Harris C, Henttu P, Parker M, Sumpter J. 1997. The estrogenic activity of phthalate esters in vitro. Environmental Health Perspectives 105: 802-811.
Jobling S, Reynolds T, White R, Parker, M, Sumpter J. 1995. A variety of environmentally persistent chemicals, including some phthalate plasticizers are weakly estrogenic. Environmental Health Perspectives 103: 582-587.
Kanno J, Onyon L, Peddada S, Ashby, J, Jacob E, Owens W. 2003. The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay. Phase 2: Coded single dose studies. Environmental Health Perspectives 111: 1550-1558.
Kessler W Numtip W Grote K, Csanady G, Chahoud I, Filser J. 2004. Body burden of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and its primary metabolite mono(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP) in pregnant and non-pregnant rats and marmosets. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 195: 142-153.
Kessler W, Phokha W, Csanady G, Filser J. 2001. No background concentrations of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and mono(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in blood of rats. Archives of Toxicology 75: 62-64.
Klaunig J, Babich M, Baetcke K, Cook J, Corton J, David R, DeLuca J, Lai D, McKee R, Peters J, Roberts R, Fenner-Crisp P. 2003. PPAR-alpha agonist-induced rodent tumors: modes of action and human relevance, Critical Reviews in Toxicology 33(6):655-780 (available at
http://www.epa.gov/oscpmont/sap/2003/december9/ crittox33665578003.pdf).
Kluwe W. 1982. Overview of the phthalate ester pharmacokinetics in mammalian species. Environmental Health Perspectives 45: 3-10.
Li S-T, Lozano P, Gross D, Graham E. 2002. Hormone -containing hair product use in prepubertal children. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 156:85-86.
Lovekamp-Swan T Davis B. 2003. Mechanisms of phthalate ester toxicity in the female reproductive system. Environmental Health Perspectives 111: 139-145.
Lovekamp-Swan T, Jetten A, Davis B. 2003. Dual activation of PPAR? and PPAR? by mono-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in rat ovarian granulosa cells. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 201: 133-141.
McKee R, Butala J, David R, Gans G. 2004. NTP Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction Reports on Phthalates: Addressing the Data Gaps. Reproductive Toxicology 18: 1-22.
Moore N. 2000. The oestrogenic potential of the phthalate esters. Reproductive Toxicology 14: 183-192.
Moore R, Rudy T, Lin T, Ko K, Peterson R. 2001. Abnormalities of sexual development in male rats with in utero and lactational exposure to the antiandrogenic plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate. Environmental Health Perspectives 109: 229-237.
Mylchreest E, Cattley R, Foster P. 1998. Male reproductive tract malformations in rats following gestational and lactational exposure to di(n-butyl) phthalate: An antiandrogenic mechanism? Toxicological Sciences 43: 47-60.
Mylchreest E, Sar M, Cattley R, Foster P. 1999. Disruption of androgen-regulated male reproductive development by di(n-butyl) phthalate during late gestation in rats is different from flutamide. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 156: 81-95.
Parks L, Ostby J, Lambright C, Abbott B, Klinefelter G, Barlow N, Gray L. 2000. The plasticizer diethylhexyl phthalate induces malformations by decreasing fetal testosterone synthesis during sexual differentiation in the male rat. Toxicological Sciences 58: 339-349.
Peck C, Albro P. 1982. Toxic potential of the plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in the context of its disposition and metabolism in primates and man. Environmental Health Perspectives 45: 11-17.
Picard K, Lhuguenot J-C, Lavier-Canivenc M-C, Chagnon M-C. 2001. Estrogenic activity and metabolism of N-butyl benzyl phthalate in vitro: Identification of the active molecules. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 172: 108-111.
Soto A, Sonnenschein C, Chung K, Fernandez M, Olea N, Serrano F. 1995. The E-screen assay as a tool to identify estrogens: An update on estrogenic environmental pollutants. Environmental Health Perspectives, 103 (supplement 7), 113-122.
Tiwary C. 1998. Premature sexual development in children following the use of estrogen- or placenta-containing hair products. Clinical Pediatrics 37: 733-740.
Zacharewski T, Meek M, Clemons J, Wu Z, Fielden, M, Matthews, J. 1998. Examination of the in vitro and in vivo estrogenic activities of eight commercial phthalate esters. Toxicological Sciences 46: 282-293.
|
|
|
