Abstract
Endocrine disrupting chemicals pose a growing threat to human health through their increasing presence in the environment and their potential interactions with the mammalian endocrine systems. Due to their structural similarity to hormones like estrogen, these chemicals can interfere with endocrine signaling, leading to many deleterious effects. Exposure to estrogenic endocrine disrupting compounds is a suggested risk factor for the development of breast cancer, one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers in women. However, the mechanisms through which endocrine disrupting compounds contribute to breast cancer development remain elusive. In order to rapidly proliferate, cancer cells undertake distinct metabolic programs to utilize existing nutrients in the tumor microenvironment and synthesize macromolecules de novo. Endocrine disrupting compounds are known to dysregulate cell signaling pathways related to cellular metabolism, which may be an important mechanism through which they exert their cancer-promoting effects. These altered pathways can be studied via metabolomic analysis, a new advancement in -omics technologies that can interrogate molecular pathways that favor cancer development and progression. This review will summarize recent discoveries regarding endocrine disrupting compounds and the metabolic reprogramming that they may induce to facilitate the development of breast cancer.
Keywords: endocrine disrupting compounds, breast cancer, metabolomics, bisphenols, phthalates, zeranol
1. Introduction
Outside of skin cancers, breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed in women [1, 2]. Only a small portion of breast cancers are linked to known hereditary mutations; most breast cancers are the result of unknown factors [3, 4]. It is also clear that the etiology of breast cancer is multifactorial. Both the incidence of breast cancers in the US and the use of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) in consumer-grade products, as well as their prevalence in the environment, rose drastically in the last half century [5]. The increase in breast cancer diagnoses could at least in part be due to the increased exposures to various EDCs.
It is the estrogenic effect of EDCs that most likely facilitates the development of breast cancer. The most notable and well-studied estrogenic EDCs include phthalates, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and bisphenol A (BPA) [6]. However, there are many EDCs that have not garnered attention until recently, such as the mycotoxins produced by crop-contaminating fungi [7] and phytoestrogens produced by plants [8]. These EDCs have demonstrated cause for concern due to their binding affinity and activation of the estrogen receptors [9, 10]. Mechanistically, the downstream estrogen signaling induced by estrogenic EDCs and the related increase in cancer cell proliferation, invasion, and metastasis have been well-established [11–14]. These chemicals may ultimately result in elevated mammary proliferation and breast cancer.
Metabolomics utilizes computational biochemistry and bioinformatics to map the ratios of chemicals present in a sample. In biological applications, this can uncover novel mechanisms of complex diseases such as cancer. The metabolome has been a subject of cancer research for decades. In the late 1920s, Warburg described a metabolic shift in cancer cells from complete oxidation of glucose to carbon dioxide to aerobic glycolysis. This pathway results in the conversion of glucose into lactate, instead of full oxidation [15]. This phenomenon was later titled ‘the Warburg effect.’ Since Warburg’s initial discovery, countless researchers have shown that this transition, key to rapid cell growth and proliferation, is not restricted to cancer cells. In fact, budding yeast [16], rapidly developing tissues [17], and even replicating pathogens [18] use this metabolic reorientation to sustain rapid growth. Many distinct rationales have been proposed for why cancer cells use Warburg’s metabolism to grow, including speed of energy retrieval, involvement of the tumor microenvironment, and the production of carbon skeletons for biomolecule synthesis [19–21]. Each explanation fails to provide sufficient conceptual evidence for a complete explanation of why cancer cells invariably use Warburg’s metabolism to grow. Since the advent of -omics technologies, newfound interest has been placed on the subject of metabolomic pathways in cancer. In addition to Warburg’s phenomenon, scientists have uncovered many more hallmarks of cancer cell metabolism, such as alterations to mitochondrial metabolic pathways, lipid turnover, and nucleotide biosynthesis [22–24]. Even still, a consensus on how these distinct metabolomic programs aid cancer proliferation, survival, and resistance to treatment remain elusive [25, 26].
To interpret how cancer cells shift their nutrient utilization, it is paramount to also consider the metabolites that are present within the tumor microenvironment [27]. This extrinsic factor can influence the nutrients available to cancer cells, leading to an increase or decrease in overall survival. Heterogeneity in the tumor microenvironment amongst patients with cancer is largely dictated by the metabolomic state of the individual, in addition to the organ in which the cancer resides. Thus, metabolomic considerations must also use a whole-body, organ-system encompassing perspective. It is well established that pathological metabolic dysregulation is closely associated with cancer risk [28]. Type II Diabetes Mellitus (DM) has been epidemiologically associated with lifetime diagnosis of many cancers, including liver, pancreatic, and breast cancers [29]. Mechanistically, this association is thought to be related to the metabolic shifts that occur as a result of Type II DM, such as hyperlipidemia, hyperinsulinemia, and hyperglycemia [30]. Higher levels of lipids, insulin, and glucose are all strongly associated with cancer promotion [31]. Another hypothesis, which is not mutually exclusive from the former, proposes that the reactive oxygen species and disturbance to antioxidant protection well-associated with metabolic diseases may also favor cancer progression [32]. Thus, the global metabolome may also be a key factor in facilitating cancer proliferation and progression, in addition to intrinsic cancer cell metabolism pathways.
2. Metabolomics as a Technique to Identify Cellular Changes
Metabolomics offers an accurate and physiologically relevant perspective on how the body is responding to a given stimulus [33]. It offers insight into the molecular pathways that are followed after the cellular ‘central dogma’ of DNA, RNA, and protein signaling is altered. Integration of metabolomics with other -omics techniques, such as transcriptomics, can reveal novel pathways in response to perturbations. To validate metabolomics as a tool to assess downstream molecular pathways, studies have demonstrated that the changes to the metabolomic signature correlate to transcriptomic changes in biological systems. This has been demonstrated in breast cancer [34, 35], cervical cancer [36], prostate cancer [37], and pancreatic cancer [38]. Thus, metabolomic analysis appears to be a valid and consistent approach to measuring the biological mechanisms that contribute to the initiation and promotion of cancer.
Metabolomic analysis can be performed on many sample types. In human studies, this approach can be used to assess the ratios of metabolites in serum or in tumor explants. Metabolomics can also be applied to samples collected from in vivo animal models. Metabolites can also be extracted from in vitro cell models to identify intrinsic cellular metabolic pathways, or from the extracellular media to assess what compounds are being produced by these colonies. However, using in vitro cell culture for metabolomic analysis has severe limitations. Cell metabolism is highly sensitive and subject to rapid changes following any type of perturbation. Even the process of extracting metabolites from cell culture can produce artifacts by introducing stress-based metabolomic responses [39]. Additionally, there are stark differences between how cells perform in cell culture conditions versus in physiological conditions. While they have their limitations, in vitro studies are increasingly popular, especially after the growing sentiment within the scientific community to abide by the 3Rs and refrain from unnecessary animal use. In vitro studies are also quick, inexpensive, and excellent for generating hypotheses and screening compounds. However, results from cell culture studies must be validated in animal and/or human studies.
There are several detection techniques that can be utilized to identify the ratios of chemicals within a sample. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and mass spectrometry (MS) are among the most common approaches utilized to analyze the metabolites within a given sample [40]. NMR spectroscopy utilizes the principles of nuclear spin and magnetism. When an external magnetic field is applied to a chemical, the electrically charged nuclei of each atom will respond by spinning in a direction that correlates with its chemical environment [41]. The most commonly used nucleus in NMR analysis is the hydrogen proton (1H). The different resonant frequencies of each hydrogen atom in a compound after application of a magnetic field is recorded and plotted in a spectra [41]. The peaks within an NMR spectrum can be analyzed to determine the structure of the original compound [41]. NMR analysis is very reproducible, but not as sensitive as MS analysis. MS analysis utilizes ionization to add electrical charges to sample material. Then, an ion detector separates these ions based on their mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) and quantifies their abundance within the sample [42]. The resulting spectra can be analyzed to determine chemical structure. MS can detect a greater quantity of individual metabolites, though more complex sample preparation is required [43]. Metabolomic analysis generated from both NMR and MS can be targeted or untargeted. The former involves assessing known biomarkers for which identified NMR or MS peaks have been established. The latter involves a more thorough approach by looking at all analytes in a sample, even if unknown, yielding a vast data-set and potential for novel discoveries [44]. After data have been collected, a set of intricate statistical tools is available to interpret the dataset. There are two broad classes of analysis that researchers use when assessing data: supervised analysis and unsupervised analysis [45]. Supervised analysis uses pre-inputted patterns, such as known cellular molecular pathways, to uncover correlations from the dataset. Unsupervised analysis draws patterns from the dataset without any pre-input knowledge, with all of the data points treated as equal variables. This form of analysis is often used on preliminary exploratory data-sets, and is more useful on smaller data-sets [46].
3. Metabolomics and Breast Cancer
Many metabolomic shifts have been identified in breast cancer [47–49]. One study found that breast cancer cells have marked changes in choline and fatty acid metabolism in vitro [50]. It has also been shown that residual breast cancer cells from primary tumors of human patients undergo distinct changes to fatty acid synthesis to survive with limited nutrients [51]. By increasing free fatty acid stores, cancer cells can survive without nutrients from vasculature, especially before angiogenesis occurs. These changes are thought to reflect the high energy requirement of cancer cells. Of additional importance are the metabolic trends that occur throughout disease progression [52]. As breast cancer develops, cancer cells face numerous diverse challenges, and must adapt to survive in their ever-changing environment. Thus, metabolism changes reflect how these cells are altering their energy sources and utilization. In a retrospective study of patients after surgery, the metabolic spectra from early and late-stage breast cancer were clearly distinguishable. Serum from patients with metastatic breast cancer had lower levels of histidine and higher levels of glucose and lipids. A model developed based on these changes was able to identify early, operable breast cancers with a histological grade of 3 versus metastatic breast cancer 83.7% of the time [53]. It is important to note that this study investigated the global metabolome of study participants by assessing their blood serum, rather than the metabolome of individual breast cancer cells. The cause of the observed serum metabolic profiles is unknown; the increased metabolite concentrations may be a result of the metastatic breast cancer, or a reflection of a global metabolic state that may have influenced the metastasis of the breast cancer. Sufficient data is lacking to confirm either hypothesis. Future studies should also include metabolic disorders like obesity and Type II DM as co-variables to assess how these pathologies may influence the global metabolome and risk of breast cancer metastasis. However, this study does highlight the value of metabolomics not only as a mechanistic tool, but also as a potential diagnostic one. Biomarkers may be able to distinguish the disease prognosis of breast cancer patients. In fact, a well-documented metabolomic biomarker used to screen cancer patients is plasma free amino acid (PFAA) profiling [54]. A study that assessed the PFAA profile of breast cancer patients found that amino acid concentrations in serum differed depending on their Tumor Node Metastasis (TNM) clinical stage [55]. These studies largely focused on outcome prediction in diagnosed breast cancer cases based on serum metabolites. These alterations may be useful to diagnose breast cancer and determine prognosis in a less invasive manner. However, they do not yet point towards any identifiable metabolomic mechanism for the initiation and progression of breast cancer. Many more human and in vivo studies are required to elucidate the role metabolism plays in breast cancer, and how this can be influenced by exposure to toxic chemicals.
4. Endocrine Disrupting Compounds and the Breast Cancer Metabolome
‘Endocrine disruptors or endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs)’ are defined as any chemical, naturally occurring or manmade, that mimics endogenous hormones involved in the endocrine system. They most commonly disrupt endocrine functions by interacting with hormone receptors. In recent years, EDCs have become increasingly prevalent due to environmental contamination and industrial applications [56]. The most common EDCs agonize the estrogen receptor due to their chemical similarity to the hormone β-estradiol [57] (Figure 1). This structural similarity confers estrogenic EDCs with the ability to signal through estrogen pathways as both agonists and antagonists [58]. Direct and indirect interaction with hormone signaling pathways via exposure to EDCs have been linked to many human diseases, including breast cancer, thyroid disease, metabolomic disorders, and reproductive pathologies [59–68]. EDCs can also disrupt the metabolome, and have been associated with metabolomic disorders like Type II DM, obesity, and fatty liver disease [69]. However, the effects of EDCs on the metabolome of breast cancer are less clear (Table 1). It is important to identify how EDCs may facilitate breast cancer development, so that proper risk assessment can be performed. Additionally, this research could be used to develop therapeutic intervention techniques and/or chemoprevention measures for a deadly disease. This review will describe the current state of knowledge on how various EDCs alter the global metabolome and the metabolome of breast cancer.
Figure 1. Chemical structures of environmentally relevant estrogenic endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs).

The structures of estrogen (beta-estradiol), bisphenol-A (BPA), Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), alpha-zeranol (aZAL), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are shown.
Table 1:
Metabolomic alterations induced by relevant environmental EDCs
| Type of Study | Principle Findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| PCBs | ||
| Human | PCBs were paramount in altering fatty acid biosynthesis pathways | [85] |
| In vitro/ In vivo | The PCB metabolite PCB29-pQ induced aerobic glycolysis and GLUT1 upregulation in cell culture, resulting in metastasis in a xenograft model | [81] |
| In vivo | PCB exposure increased metastatic potential of xenografts | [77] |
| Bisphenols | ||
| In vitro | BPA altered apolipoproteins, and urea cycle and Krebs cycle intermediates, resulting in amino acid concentration changes in HepG2 cells. | [106] |
| In vitro | BPA impacted nucleotide synthesis in MCF-7 cells | [110] |
| In vitro | In a ‘leave one out’ approach, BPA was shown to be necessary to inducing changes in purine and pyrimidine metabolism in MCF-7 | [111] |
| In vitro | BPS dysregulated the citric acid cycle, purine metabolism, and lipid metabolism in MCF-10A cells. | [114] |
| In vitro | TBBPA and TCBPA induced glycolytic intermediates and altered glutathione metabolism in MCF10A cells. | [115] |
| In vivo | BPF induced changes in glutathione biosynthesis, glycerophospholipid and glycerolipid degradation, and glycolysis in MDA-MB-231 xenografted mice | [112] |
| In vivo | BPA changed the global metabolome in the whole body of CD-1 mouse pups exposed perinatally. | [145] |
| Phthalates | ||
| Human | Phthalate metabolites in the serum of pregnant women were correlated with lipid dysregulation | [146] |
| In vivo | DBP and BBP increased xenografted MDA-MB-231 tumor size | [14] |
| Zeranols | ||
| Humans | Exposure to ZEN and its metabolites was associated with increased incidence of breast cancer in Tunisian women[129] | [129] |
| In vitro | a-ZAL induced changes to protein biosynthesis, the urea cycle, methionine metabolism, and arginine/proline metabolism in MCF-7 cells | [142] |
| In vivo | a-ZAL increased mammary proliferation in a rat model | [135] |
4.1. Polychlorinated biphenyls
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a family of over 200 congener chemicals with similar chemical structure, featuring biphenyl moieties with chlorine groups variably attached to the carbon ring [70]. They were used in the manufacture of electrical conductors and fluid coolants until 1979, when their use was banned in the United States due to their well-known carcinogenic properties [71] (Figure 2). However, human exposure still occurs due to environmental persistence and lipid bioaccumulation [72], and they are still found consistently in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) biomonitoring studies [73]. Many PCB congeners have been linked with breast cancer in both retrospective and prospective epidemiology studies [74–76]. In vivo studies, though few in quantity, also corroborate a role for PCB exposure in breast cancer development (Figure 3). Exposure to PCBs increased the metastatic potential of MDA-MB-231 xenografts in nu/nu mice, evidenced by an increase in the number and size of detectable metastases in distal organs [77]. Interestingly, MDA-MB-231 is derived from a triple-negative breast adenocarcinoma, meaning it does not express the classical estrogen receptor alpha. This observation may be an indirect effect of general immunosuppression, as PCB is suggested to impair immune surveillance and response [78]. It is unclear what specific mechanisms may be responsible for the observed increase in metastatic potential seen in this study. In vitro studies have demonstrated that some PCBs have estrogenic effects in ER-positive breast cancer cell lines. A study found that of 17 PCB congeners tested, only one increased estrogen signaling activity in an MCF-7 reporter assay, and that one congener actually antagonized estrogen signaling. This study highlights the importance of studying PCB congeners individually, instead of grouping structurally different compounds together. In another study, four structurally diverse PCB congeners increased MCF-7 cell growth. Additionally, co-treatment with the estrogen antagonist hydroxytamoxifen reversed the observed cell proliferation, suggesting the effect was caused by estrogen signaling [79]. PCB metabolites have been demonstrated as mutagens, though this requires biotransformation in the liver, where the DNA damage has been predominantly identified [80]. Taken together, these data do suggest that PCBs may play a role in breast cancer development in human, animal, and cell culture studies. Both estrogen-dependent and -independent mechanisms of cancer promotion have been suggested.
Figure 2. Environmental sources of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs). Humans are exposed to environmental EDCs from various sources.

Historically, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were added into electrical conductors and fluid coolants. Phthalates are included in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes and soft, malleable plastics, like food bagging. Bisphenols are incorporated into hard, stiff plastics, like water bottles. Zeranols are produced by the Fusarium fungus, a common contaminant of agricultural crops like corn and maize [147–150]. Human EDC exposure levels are shown.
Figure 3. The role of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) throughout breast cancer initiation, progression, and metastasis.

EDCs likely have diverse mechanisms throughout carcinogenesis [151–161].
Less is known on how PCBs may affect cancer cell metabolism. A recent study found that a PCB quinone-type metabolite, PCB29-pQ, significantly increased aerobic glycolysis in MDA-MB-231 cells, evidenced by an increase in the mRNA expression of aerobic glycolysis enzymes [81]. Additionally, the expression of GLUT1, a key transporter involved in glucose uptake known to be overexpressed in breast cancer, was significantly induced by treatment with PCB29-pQ. This over-expression was suggested to activate the GLUT1/integrin B1/Src/FAK pathway, which is crucial for the epithelial-mesenchymal-transition, extravasation, and ultimate metastasis [82, 83]. In an in vivo LUC-1 nu/nu mice xenograft study, inhibition of GLUT1 ameliorated the metastatic effect of PCB29-pQ, demonstrating a clear role for aerobic glycolysis and GLUT1 in the increased progression and invasive potential of breast cancer [81]. Overall, these results demonstrate that PCBs may affect the metabolism of breast cancer cells, specifically by increasing energy production via glycolysis (Figure 4). The role of the estrogen receptor is unclear, as no studies to date have been performed on the effects of PCBs on ER-positive cell lines.
Figure 4. Major sites of action and molecular effects of endocrine disruptor exposure.

EDCs can work through diverse molecular mechanisms upon arrival at a target site, though some pathways are conserved across various types of compounds. Bisphenols and PCBs both initiate aerobic glycolysis and lipid biosynthesis within the mammary gland. Phthalates and PCBs can both activate AhR in different target tissues. Other pathways, like nucleotide synthesis, are specific to certain compounds.
PCBs may also interact with global metabolism, in addition to directly affecting the metabolome of breast cancer cells. PCBs have been shown to induce lipid metabolism dysregulation, leading to chronic metabolic disorders like obesity and Type II DM [84]. One study used detailed community mapping techniques to connect the metabolome of the serum samples taken from study participants in the 1960s. The serum was used recently to assess the exposure of many different environmental chemicals [85]. They found that pathways involving fatty acid biosynthesis and fatty acid activation were enriched in direct association with PCB concentration in blood serum. Additionally, the study found that these pathways were significantly altered when the exposome of these individuals involved other EDCs, namely dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) [85]. This suggests that EDCs may have a synergistic effect on the global metabolome. Likely, these EDCs affect fatty acid biosynthesis and activation through AhR, PXR, and PPAR nuclear transcription signaling [86]. Lipophilic EDCs like PCBs, DDT, and PFAS can interact with these nuclear transcription factors, resulting in activation of several lipid metabolizing enzymes, fatty acid uptake proteins, and lipid biosynthesis enzymes [84, 87, 88]. Thus, EDCs may initiate common downstream metabolic pathways that facilitate the development and progression of metabolic disease, a known risk-factor for breast cancer. Lipid dysregulation is a risk factor for the development of several cancers, such as prostate cancer [89], colon cancer [90], and pancreatic cancer [91]. Additionally, altered lipid metabolism has been associated with breast cancer incidence [92]. Several studies have found that circulating free fatty acids are associated with breast cancer incidence epidemiologically, and can increase breast cancer proliferation and tumorigenicity in vitro [93, 94]. Thus, the properties of PCBs as a global lipid metabolic disruptor and a local promoter of cancer metabolism may both be responsible for facilitating their carcinogenic properties.
Understanding of how PCBs increase breast cancer risk is still incomplete, and more information is needed on how PCBs interact with both cancer cell and whole-body metabolism. It is difficult to take into account all of the exposure parameters that may affect toxicological endpoints in epidemiology studies. Exposure concentration and frequency, age at exposure, secondary health factors, and genetic polymorphisms all may affect susceptibility to PCB-induced metabolomic dysfunction and/or breast cancer. It is highly likely that PCBs, like most EDCs, have more potent effects during the windows of susceptibility, such as early in development [95]. Late-life sampling of PCBs has been shown to poorly recapitulate exposures during early-life [96]. Early-life exposures to EDCs, mainly in utero and post-natal via lactation, may reprogram both the metabolome and breast development to prime the breast for developing cancer during adulthood [97]. This could also interact with other known risk factors of breast cancer, like genetic polymorphisms, diet, and lifestyle in a synergistic fashion. Thus, more in vivo studies focusing on early-life exposures to PCBs are needed, in addition to studies assessing the metabolic axes as a potential mechanism for carcinogenesis and promotion.
4.2. Bisphenols
Bisphenols are a group of industrial chemicals used as plasticizers [98]. They are incorporated into almost all plastic consumer products and are consequently environmentally ubiquitous [99] (Figure 1). The most notorious of this class is bisphenol-A (BPA). While BPA has been banned in most countries due to its well-known toxicity as an endocrine disruptor, it is being replaced with other bisphenols, like BPF, BPS, tetrabromo-BPA (TB-BPA) and tetrachloro-BPA (TC-BPA) [100]. However, these replacement bisphenols are all structurally similar to BPA; in some cases, they differ by only one functional group. It is thus no surprise that these new bisphenols share many of the endocrine disrupting properties of BPA [101].
Many studies have suggested the carcinogenic potential of BPA, but the mechanisms are unclear. In Sprague-Dawley rats, in utero exposure to low doses of BPA resulted in neoplastic lesions and carcinomas in offspring [102]. In vivo studies suggest that BPA plays a role in increasing the susceptibility to breast cancer (Figure 3). Since breast cancer is multifactorial, many factors may play a role in the initiation and promotion of disease. Thus, BPA may act synergistically with other initiating events to promote cancer growth. One study found that in utero exposure to BPA increased the risk of developing 7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene (DMBA)-induced tumors in FVB/N mice. This same study found that BPA also acts as a growth promoter when administered to nu/nu mice xenografted with MCF-7 cells [103]. This xenograft model is limited by the fact that the cells, which were derived of an already transformed cancer line, were injected into the flank of the mice, and not within the mammary gland itself. Direct extrapolation of these data to humans is difficult, as there are numerous species differences between the human breast and the rodent mammary gland. Rodent mammary glands are simpler in structure, and do not include the heterogeneous collagen-rich stroma that the human breast contains. [104]. This can complicate the study of in vivo mammary cancers in rodent models. BPA has been shown to alter the mammary gland development of rhesus monkeys when exposed perinatally. Ultimately, this exposure resulted in significant increases in mammary bud density and complexity, but did not cause overt carcinogenic transformation [105]. This effect was comparable to the effects of BPA on the mammary gland seen in rodents, supporting the validity of studies performed in rodents.
Metabolomic analysis has been employed to assess bisphenol-induced breast cancer both in vitro and in vivo. In vitro studies have severe limitations, as they often poorly recapitulate the conditions found in the target organ the cell line was derived from. They are also clonal, meaning they have very limited genetic diversity, which hinders the ability to draw conclusions. Though they have disadvantages, in vitro studies have suggested that bisphenol-A alters global metabolism throughout the body by targeting the liver, which is crucial for regulating systemic energy homeostasis (Figure 4). As described previously, dysregulation of global metabolism has been associated with incidence of several cancers, including breast cancer. Human hepatic cell line HepG2 exposed to low doses of BPA in the micro-molar to pico-molar range displayed activation of similar metabolic pathways as estrogen. Both BPA and β-estradiol treatment modulated the urea cycle and the Krebs cycle, resulting in increases in concentrations of arginine, creatine, and glutamine within the cell [106]. The uptake and metabolism of amino acids, most notably including arginine and glutamine, is characteristically upregulated in many cancer types [107]. Additionally, BPA and β-estradiol dysregulated lipid metabolism by altering levels of apolipoproteins [106]. Apolipoproteins, which are responsible for binding to and trafficking lipids, have also been associated with poor cancer prognosis and are vital for cancer proliferation and invasion [108]. Prior studies have also linked apolipoprotein dysregulation, specifically the upregulation of Apob and downregulation of Apoc3, to BPA exposure in the liver of CD-1 mice, reinforcing this in vitro finding [109]. Taken together, these findings suggest a mechanism through which BPA facilitates cancer incidence by dysregulating lipid and amino acid metabolism throughout the body.
BPA also has a direct, local effect on the metabolome of breast cancer. BPA exposure altered nucleotide metabolism in the estrogen receptor positive cell line, MCF-7, evidenced by increases in the nucleotide precursors cytidine triphosphate (CTP) and uridine diphosphate glucuronic acid (UDPGA) [110]. Further supporting this result, a study which tested cocktails of exposures with a ‘leave one out’ approach found that BPA was crucial for altering purine and pyrimidine metabolism in MCF-7 cells, evidenced by increases in UDP, UTP, CDP, and CTP [111]. Nucleotides are essential for cellular viability and proliferation. In rapidly dividing cells, like cancer, nucleotides are used quickly, so shifting to a nucleotide salvage pathway is more efficient for DNA synthesis [23]. However, when interpreting the results of these studies, it is important to note that the MCF-7 cell line was immortalized from a fully transformed breast cancer. While its estrogen receptor positivity makes it an ideal candidate for EDC testing, it is limited in that it cannot recapitulate the unique features of cancer initiation. Distinguishing studies that utilize models that reflect early-timepoint initiation of breast cancer and models that reflect promotion and/or progression of already existing breast cancer is necessary when drawing conclusions about the role EDCs may play in facilitating the multi-step model of carcinogenesis.
Using the estrogen receptor negative cell line, MDA-MB-231, xenografted into mice, Zhao et al demonstrated that bisphenol-F (BPF), a BPA analog, induced changes in glutathione biosynthesis, glycerophospholipid and glycerolipids degradation, and glycolysis, resulting in larger tumors [112]. Decreases in glutathione biosynthesis can raise the concentration of reactive oxygen species, leading to DNA damage and even carcinogenesis [113]. The study also found that BPF promoted glycolysis, as assessed via the increase in the intermediates lactate, pyruvate, fructose-6-phosphate, and glucose-6-phosphate [112]. Whether these glycolytic changes are a result of the proliferation induced by BPA, or if they are the drivers of the increased tumor size remains to be determined.
BPS altered a number of metabolic pathways, including the citric acid cycle, purine metabolism, and lipid metabolism in MCF-10A cells, ultimately resulting in increased cellular proliferation [114]. The same group found similar results in MCF-7 cells exposed to TB-BPA and TC-BPA. This study revealed that TB-BPA and TC-BPA also induced glycolytic intermediates and decreased glutathione concentrations, leading to induction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) [115]. Exposure to TB-BPA and TC-BPA also induced energy metabolism from amino acids via glycolytic shunt pathways [115]. These results suggest that bisphenol analogs behave similarly in altering the metabolome of breast cancer cells, highlighting the danger of continuing the use of these alternatives commercially.
4.3. Phthalates
Phthalates are common additives found in plastics used to make softer materials like vinyl, PVC, and food packaging (Figure 2). Phthalates share chemical similarity with β-estradiol, lending them endocrine disrupting properties (Figure 1). However, the connection between phthalate exposure and breast cancer is still debated. A prospective study of more than 150,000 post-menopausal women failed to demonstrate a significant link between urinary phthalate levels and breast cancer incidence [116]. However, this study did not take early-life exposures into account, which may be most important to EDC-induced breast cancer. In contrast, a multi-ethnic prospective cohort study did find significantly increased risk of developing breast cancer in proportion to urinary levels of phthalate metabolites [117]. This study had a much lower sample size, and disclosed that their analyses were based on a single urinary sample measurement, which complicates its interpretation. While epidemiological studies have failed to demonstrate a clear and reproducible association or lack thereof between breast cancer and phthalate exposure, mechanistic studies in vitro and in vivo have been able to provide evidence that phthalates may facilitate breast cancer development (Figures 3 and 4).
The most estrogenic phthalates are di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), and benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP). These phthalates increase cell viability and proliferation as well as estrogen receptor alpha activation at low doses in the cell line MCF-7 [118]. The phthalates DBP and BBP also increased proliferation of the estrogen receptor negative cell line MDA-MB-231. This was shown to be a result of aryl-hydrocarbon-receptor (AhR) activation, resulting in downstream signaling through a histone deacetylase enzyme that increased the expression of the oncogene and tumor promoter gene c-myc [14]. Additionally, when xenografted into nu/nu mice, MDA-MB-231 tumor size was increased following exposure to DBP and BBP [14]. This study provided mechanistic insight towards how phthalates may increase progression of estrogen receptor negative breast cancer, but it does not reveal how phthalates may play a role in initiating breast cancer.
The effects of phthalates on the metabolome in human exposures have been evaluated. One study assessed metabolomic changes in the serum of pregnant women with high urinary levels of phthalate metabolites. Phthalate exposure was positively correlated with lipid dysregulation, including altered levels of lipid membrane constituents, cholesterol, and sphingomyelin [112]. This also resulted in increased levels of triacyclglycerols (TAGs) in serum, and intermediates involved in sphingosine biosynthesis [112]. These intermediates are involved in inflammatory signaling pathways. Zhao C et al also found a positive correlation between BMI and urinary phthalate metabolite levels, implying that phthalates influence metabolic function [112]. The hyperlipidemia induced in these pregnant women could facilitate and favor the development of breast cancer, especially in the presence of pseudo-hormones like phthalates. It is well established that metabolic dysregulation related pathologies, namely Type II DM, increase the risk of developing breast cancer [119]. Epidemiology studies have found an association between metabolic disorder and phthalate exposure. Indeed, urinary levels of phthalate metabolites from an NHANES 2001–2010 study were linearly correlated with metabolic syndrome [120]. The metabolic changes induced by phthalate exposure may increase risk of breast cancer by systemically transitioning the metabolome to cancer-favoring conditions.
4.4. Zeranols
Zearalenones are mycotoxins produced by the Fusarium fungal genus, common contaminates of corn and grains (Figure 2). Humans consume zearalenone containing grains, resulting in oral exposures. Zearalenone is metabolized to other beta-resorcyclic acid lactones (RALs) in the liver, some of which possess more potent endocrine disrupting properties than the parent compound [121]. Among the most estrogenic metabolites of zearalenone (ZEN) is alpha-zearalenol. Alpha-zearalenol has been manufactured into the synthetic hormone Zeranol™. In the cattle industry, this compound is routinely administered to beef cattle to boost growth and meat production rates. This practice has led to concerns in recent years of an additional human exposure to this potentially damaging class of EDCs. As a result of these multiple exposure routes, zearalenone and its derivatives have been found in human serum [122] and human urine [123].
Zeranol, zearalenone, and other RALs share chemical similarity with endogenous beta-estradiol (Figure 1). Zearalenone and its related metabolites have been shown to competitively bind to the mammalian estrogen receptor [124]. This is perhaps attributable to the flexibility of the RAL ring structure [125]. Additionally, after binding to the receptor, zeranol activates downstream estrogenic signaling pathways, indicating that the chemical is not only capable of fitting into the binding pocket of the estrogen receptor, but also is able to induce the downstream events activating an estrogenic signaling cascade [126].
Epidemiological studies have demonstrated that exposure to ZEN and its metabolites is associated with developmental defects consistent with disruption of the endocrine system. ZEN levels were associated with developmental delays in height and breast development [127]. In a 10 year longitudinal study, high serum levels of ZEN were associated with amenorrhea and pubertal delays [128]. Most notably, ZEN levels in urine were associated with an increased incidence of breast cancer in a Tunisia population of women [129]. Thus, more studies are required to elucidate the role of ZEN and its related metabolites on initiating and promoting breast cancer.
Both zearalenone and alpha-zearalenol have been shown to stimulate proliferation of various cancer cell lines in vitro [130]. Investigators have provided evidence of cancer promotion during several distinct stages of breast cancer development (Figure 3). Zeranol decreases doubling-time in MCF-10A cells and induces a neoplastic transformation when dosed repeatedly in this cell model [131]. MCF-10A is an immortalized normal breast cell line that models a very early proliferative stage of breast tissue. Zeranol at low concentrations stimulates growth of the ER positive cancer cell lines MCF7 and KPL-1, perhaps mediated by the downregulation of the cell cycle inhibitor p21Cip1 [132]. These cell lines represent a later stage of breast cancer development, when the tumor already displays invasive characteristics. In the estrogen receptor positive breast adenocarcinoma cell line MCF-7, the obesity hormone leptin exhibited a synergistic effect on cell proliferation when co-treated with zeranol. This suggested that metabolomic dysfunction was involved in zeranol’s tumor promoting effect on these breast cells [133]. These changes also occur in primary breast cancer epithelial cells, strengthening the conclusion that zeranol plays a role in metabolomic dysfunction and cancer [134].
In vivo studies modeling zeranol exposures with breast cancer related endpoints are few. However, existing studies suggest zeranol behaves similarly to estrogen, which is known to cause growth proliferation and carcinogenesis in animal models. In rats, zeranol has been shown to increase mammary growth [135]. This proliferative response mimics the characteristic cancer promoting pattern of estrogen. Zeranol may also cause overt carcinogenesis in the ACI rat model, though the results of this study are very unclear due to the small sample size [136].
It is important to distinguish between hyperplasia and carcinogenesis when considering animal studies that model mammary cancer through hormonal stimulation. Estrogen behaves as a growth-promoting agent through its activation of downstream estrogenic targets involved in cell cycle control. Additionally, estrogen can act as a genotoxic agent by producing ROS, though the exact mechanisms are unclear [137]. However, stimulation of mitochondrial metabolism and excessive production of hydrogen peroxide have been proposed as potential mechanisms [138]. Taken together, estrogen induces mammary hyperplasia in the short-term and carcinogenesis in the long-term in animal models, including the ACI rat [139, 140]. Zeranol has been demonstrated as a growth-promoter through activation of the estrogen receptor, but it remains to be seen whether it can initiate the first step of the carcinogenic process, induction of DNA damage that ultimately progresses to transformed cells. Zearalenones may cause oxidative stress through the production of ROS, ultimately resulting in DNA damage. In CHO-K1 ovarian cells, an increase in ROS and a resulting induction of DNA damage was identified after exposure to zearalenone and its metabolites [141]. Mechanistically, it is plausible that zeranol may be able to initiate breast cancers through causing DNA damage and estrogenic growth promotion. However, more robust animal studies are required to test this hypothesis.
To date, only one study has assessed metabolomic changes induced by zeranols in a cancer model. This study, which used MCF-7 as an estrogen sensitive in vitro model, found that zeranol changed the metabolomic signature of cancer cells to facilitate cancer progression and invasion [142]. Protein biosynthesis, the urea cycle, methionine metabolism, and arginine/proline metabolism were found to be differentially regulated by pathway analysis. Specifically, the study found that cysteine and glutathione levels were elevated in the zeranol treated MCF-7 cells. This supports the finding that zeranol increases ROS, as cysteine and glutathione are stimulated by higher levels of ROS. Additionally, the study found that choline levels were elevated following zeranol exposure. Choline is vital for maintaining membrane stability and is a biomarker that has been suggested for clinical use to identify invasive tumors [143, 144]. Overall, there are many knowledge gaps in how zeranols may promote breast cancer, but the studies reported thus far demonstrate cause for reasonable concern that this endocrine disruptor may be able to initiate, promote, and progress breast cancer.
5. Conclusion
Endocrine disruptor exposure has been linked to breast cancer incidence, prognosis, and metastasis. The scientific community has not yet reached a consensus on the risk endocrine disrupting chemicals pose, and how they may cause hormonal cancers. A clearer mechanistic understanding of how these chemicals induce their putative carcinogenic action(s) is needed. Metabolomic analysis has demonstrated that various well-known EDCs alter the metabolic signature of breast cancer cells to better suit survival needs, most commonly by increasing lipid metabolism. Additionally, EDCs may dysregulate global metabolism, leading to higher nutrient availability that could ultimately aid in cancer initiation and progression. These trends can be used to identify and characterize the effects of other EDCs and cancer-causing toxicants more accurately and efficiently. Additionally, further research should investigate potential mechanisms, both estrogen receptor dependent and independent, through which EDCs may alter metabolism in breast cancer.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the internal reviewers, Dr. Kenneth Reuhl from the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and Dr. Philip Furmanski from the Department of Chemical Biology, Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey for their critical review and helpful feedback on this manuscript. This work was supported by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health of the National Institutes of Health [R01 AT007036], the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences grant [ES005022], National Cancer Institute [R03 CA259650], Charles and Johanna Busch Memorial Fund at Rutgers University and the New Jersey Health Foundation. The authors would like to thank BioRender.com, which was used to create Figures 2–4.
Financial Support:
This research was supported by the National Institutes of Health grants, R01 AT007036, R03 CA259650, ES005022, New Jersey Health Foundation, Busch Biomedical Grant, and NIEHS/CEED Pilot Grant.
Abbreviations:
- AhR
Aryl-Hydrocarbon Receptor
- BBP
Benzyl Butyl Phthalate
- BMI
Body Mass Index
- BPA
Bisphenol A
- BPF
Bisphenol F
- BPS
Bisphenol S
- CDP
Cytidine Diphosphate
- CTP
Cytidine Triphosphate
- DBP
Dibutyl Phthalate
- DDT
Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
- DEHP
Di(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
- DM
Diabetes Mellitus
- DMBA
7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
- EDCs
Endocrine Disrupting Compounds
- ER
Estrogen Receptor
- MS
Mass Spectrometry
- NHANES
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
- NMR
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
- PCBs
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
- PFAA
Plasma Free Amino Acid
- PFAS
Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
- RALs
Resorcyclic Acid Lactones
- ROS
Reactive Oxygen Species
- TAGs
Triacylglycerols
- TB-BPA
Tetrabromo-BPA
- TC-BPA
Tetrachloro-BPA
- TNM
Tumor Node Metastasis Classification of Malignant Tumors
- UDPGA
Uridine Diphosphate Glucuronic Acid
- UTPGA
Uridine Triphosphate Glucuronic Acid
- ZEN
Zearalenone
Footnotes
Declaration of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
References
- 1.Yager JD and Davidson NE, Estrogen carcinogenesis in breast cancer. N Engl J Med, 2006. 354(3): p. 270–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Siegel RL, et al. , Cancer statistics, 2022. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2022. 72(1): p. 7–33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Rudolph A, Chang-Claude J, and Schmidt MK, Gene–environment interaction and risk of breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 2016. 114(2): p. 125–133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Lichtenstein P, et al. , Environmental and Heritable Factors in the Causation of Cancer — Analyses of Cohorts of Twins from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. New England Journal of Medicine, 2000. 343(2): p. 78–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Bray F, McCarron P, and Parkin DM, The changing global patterns of female breast cancer incidence and mortality. Breast Cancer Research, 2004. 6(6): p. 229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Eve L, et al. , Exposure to Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals and Risk of Breast Cancer. International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. 21(23): p. 9139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Kinkade CW, et al. , Impact of Fusarium-Derived Mycoestrogens on Female Reproduction: A Systematic Review. Toxins (Basel), 2021. 13(6). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Murkies AL, Wilcox G, and Davis SR, Clinical review 92: Phytoestrogens. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 1998. 83(2): p. 297–303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kowalska K, et al. , Estrogen Receptor α Is Crucial in Zearalenone-Induced Invasion and Migration of Prostate Cancer Cells. Toxins (Basel), 2018. 10(3). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kostelac D, Rechkemmer G, and Briviba K, Phytoestrogens modulate binding response of estrogen receptors alpha and beta to the estrogen response element. J Agric Food Chem, 2003. 51(26): p. 7632–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Calaf GM, et al. , Endocrine disruptors from the environment affecting breast cancer. Oncology letters, 2020. 20(1): p. 19–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Williams GP and Darbre PD, Low-dose environmental endocrine disruptors, increase aromatase activity, estradiol biosynthesis and cell proliferation in human breast cells. Mol Cell Endocrinol, 2019. 486: p. 55–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Khanna S, Dash PR, and Darbre PD, Exposure to parabens at the concentration of maximal proliferative response increases migratory and invasive activity of human breast cancer cells in vitro. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 2014. 34(9): p. 1051–1059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Hsieh T-H, et al. , Phthalates induce proliferation and invasiveness of estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer through the AhR/HDAC6/c-Myc signaling pathway. The FASEB Journal, 2012. 26(2): p. 778–787. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Warburg O, On the origin of cancer cells. Science, 1956. 123(3191): p. 309–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Bouchez CL, et al. , The Warburg Effect in Yeast: Repression of Mitochondrial Metabolism Is Not a Prerequisite to Promote Cell Proliferation. Frontiers in Oncology, 2020. 10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Krisher RL and Prather RS, A role for the Warburg effect in preimplantation embryo development: metabolic modification to support rapid cell proliferation. Mol Reprod Dev, 2012. 79(5): p. 311–20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Icard P, et al. , The key role of Warburg effect in SARS-CoV-2 replication and associated inflammatory response. Biochimie, 2021. 180: p. 169–177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Slavov N, et al. , Constant growth rate can be supported by decreasing energy flux and increasing aerobic glycolysis. Cell Rep, 2014. 7(3): p. 705–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Gatenby RA and Gawlinski ET, A reaction-diffusion model of cancer invasion. Cancer Res, 1996. 56(24): p. 5745–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Vander Heiden MG, Cantley LC, and Thompson CB, Understanding the Warburg effect: the metabolic requirements of cell proliferation. Science, 2009. 324(5930): p. 1029–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Cheng C, et al. , Lipid metabolism reprogramming and its potential targets in cancer. Cancer Commun (Lond), 2018. 38(1): p. 27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Ma J, et al. , Emerging roles of nucleotide metabolism in cancer development: progress and prospect. Aging (Albany NY), 2021. 13(9): p. 13349–13358. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Porporato PE, et al. , Mitochondrial metabolism and cancer. Cell Res, 2018. 28(3): p. 265–280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Chen X, Chen S, and Yu D, Metabolic Reprogramming of Chemoresistant Cancer Cells and the Potential Significance of Metabolic Regulation in the Reversal of Cancer Chemoresistance. Metabolites, 2020. 10(7). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Johnson CH, et al. , Metabolomics guided pathway analysis reveals link between cancer metastasis, cholesterol sulfate, and phospholipids. Cancer Metab, 2017. 5: p. 9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Elia I and Haigis MC, Metabolites and the tumour microenvironment: from cellular mechanisms to systemic metabolism. Nature Metabolism, 2021. 3(1): p. 21–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Faulds MH and Dahlman-Wright K, Metabolic diseases and cancer risk. Curr Opin Oncol, 2012. 24(1): p. 58–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Bjornsdottir HH, et al. , A national observation study of cancer incidence and mortality risks in type 2 diabetes compared to the background population over time. Scientific Reports, 2020. 10(1): p. 17376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Samuel SM, et al. , Challenges and perspectives in the treatment of diabetes associated breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rev, 2018. 70: p. 98–111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Yee LD, et al. , Metabolic Health, Insulin, and Breast Cancer: Why Oncologists Should Care About Insulin. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne), 2020. 11: p. 58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Jin S, et al. , Oxidants and antioxidants in metabolic syndrome and cancer. Oxid Med Cell Longev, 2014. 2014: p. 178962. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Wishart DS, Metabolomics for Investigating Physiological and Pathophysiological Processes. Physiological Reviews, 2019. 99(4): p. 1819–1875. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Luo X, et al. , Integration of metabolomic and transcriptomic data reveals metabolic pathway alteration in breast cancer and impact of related signature on survival. Journal of Cellular Physiology, 2019. 234(8): p. 13021–13031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Hassan MA, et al. , Integration of Transcriptome and Metabolome Provides Unique Insights to Pathways Associated With Obese Breast Cancer Patients. Frontiers in Oncology, 2020. 10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Yang K, et al. , A Comprehensive Analysis of Metabolomics and Transcriptomics in Cervical Cancer. Scientific Reports, 2017. 7(1): p. 43353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Ren S, et al. , Integration of Metabolomics and Transcriptomics Reveals Major Metabolic Pathways and Potential Biomarker Involved in Prostate Cancer*. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics, 2016. 15(1): p. 154–163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Zhang G, et al. , Integration of Metabolomics and Transcriptomics Revealed a Fatty Acid Network Exerting Growth Inhibitory Effects in Human Pancreatic Cancer. Clinical Cancer Research, 2013. 19(18): p. 4983–4993. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Moreno-Torres M, et al. , Factors that influence the quality of metabolomics data in in vitro cell toxicity studies: a systematic survey. Scientific Reports, 2021. 11(1): p. 22119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Claudino WM, et al. , Metabolomics: available results, current research projects in breast cancer, and future applications. J Clin Oncol, 2007. 25(19): p. 2840–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Marion D, An introduction to biological NMR spectroscopy. Mol Cell Proteomics, 2013. 12(11): p. 3006–25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Wait R, Introduction to mass spectrometry. Methods Mol Biol, 1993. 17: p. 191–213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Emwas AH, The strengths and weaknesses of NMR spectroscopy and mass spectrometry with particular focus on metabolomics research. Methods Mol Biol, 2015. 1277: p. 161–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Roberts LD, et al. , Targeted metabolomics. Curr Protoc Mol Biol, 2012. Chapter 30: p. Unit 30.2.1–24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Liland KH, Multivariate methods in metabolomics – from pre-processing to dimension reduction and statistical analysis. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2011. 30(6): p. 827–841. [Google Scholar]
- 46.Rowland JJ, Model selection methodology in supervised learning with evolutionary computation. Biosystems, 2003. 72(1): p. 187–196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Hart CD, et al. , Metabolomics in Breast Cancer: Current Status and Perspectives. Adv Exp Med Biol, 2016. 882: p. 217–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Yang L, et al. , Application of metabolomics in the diagnosis of breast cancer: a systematic review. J Cancer, 2020. 11(9): p. 2540–2551. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.An R, et al. , Integrative analysis of plasma metabolomics and proteomics reveals the metabolic landscape of breast cancer. Cancer & Metabolism, 2022. 10(1): p. 13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Yang C, et al. , COMPARATIVE METABOLOMICS OF BREAST CANCER, in Biocomputing 2007. 2006, WORLD SCIENTIFIC. p. 181–192. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Havas KM, et al. , Metabolic shifts in residual breast cancer drive tumor recurrence. J Clin Invest, 2017. 127(6): p. 2091–2105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Vinayavekhin N, Homan EA, and Saghatelian A, Exploring Disease through Metabolomics. ACS Chemical Biology, 2010. 5(1): p. 91–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Tenori L, et al. , Serum metabolomic profiles evaluated after surgery may identify patients with oestrogen receptor negative early breast cancer at increased risk of disease recurrence. Results from a retrospective study. Mol Oncol, 2015. 9(1): p. 128–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Lai HS, et al. , Plasma free amino acid profile in cancer patients. Semin Cancer Biol, 2005. 15(4): p. 267–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Miyagi Y, et al. , Plasma free amino acid profiling of five types of cancer patients and its application for early detection. PLoS One, 2011. 6(9): p. e24143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Diamanti-Kandarakis E, et al. , Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: an Endocrine Society scientific statement. Endocr Rev, 2009. 30(4): p. 293–342. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Shanle EK and Xu W, Endocrine disrupting chemicals targeting estrogen receptor signaling: identification and mechanisms of action. Chem Res Toxicol, 2011. 24(1): p. 6–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Kiyama R and Wada-Kiyama Y, Estrogenic endocrine disruptors: Molecular mechanisms of action. Environ Int, 2015. 83: p. 11–40. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Kavlock RJ, et al. , Research needs for the risk assessment of health and environmental effects of endocrine disruptors: a report of the U.S. EPA-sponsored workshop. Environmental Health Perspectives, 1996. 104(suppl 4): p. 715–740. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Kabir ER, Rahman MS, and Rahman I, A review on endocrine disruptors and their possible impacts on human health. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol, 2015. 40(1): p. 241–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Ghassabian A and Trasande L, Disruption in Thyroid Signaling Pathway: A Mechanism for the Effect of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals on Child Neurodevelopment. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 2018. 9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Haverinen E, Lange R, and Tolonen H, Metabolic syndrome and endocrine disrupting chemicals: exposure and health effects. European Journal of Public Health, 2020. 30(Supplement_5). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Laws MJ, et al. , Chapter Five - Endocrine disrupting chemicals and reproductive disorders in women, men, and animal models, in Advances in Pharmacology, Vandenberg LN and Turgeon JL, Editors. 2021, Academic Press. p. 151–190. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Rodgers KM, et al. , Environmental chemicals and breast cancer: An updated review of epidemiological literature informed by biological mechanisms. Environ Res, 2018. 160: p. 152–182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Lerro CC, et al. , Organophosphate insecticide use and cancer incidence among spouses of pesticide applicators in the Agricultural Health Study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2015. 72(10): p. 736. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Niehoff NM, et al. , Childhood and adolescent pesticide exposure and breast cancer risk. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2016. 27(3): p. 326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Teitelbaum SL, et al. , Reported residential pesticide use and breast cancer risk on Long Island, New York. American Journal of Epidemiology, 2007. 165(6): p. 643–651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Villeneuve S, et al. , Occupation and occupational exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals in male breast cancer: A case-control study in Europe. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2010. 67(12): p. 837–844. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Küblbeck J, et al. , The EDCMET Project: Metabolic Effects of Endocrine Disruptors. International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. 21(8): p. 3021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Carpenter DO, Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): routes of exposure and effects on human health. Rev Environ Health, 2006. 21(1): p. 1–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Lauby-Secretan B, et al. , Carcinogenicity of polychlorinated biphenyls and polybrominated biphenyls. Lancet Oncol, 2013. 14(4): p. 287–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Beyer A and Biziuk M, Environmental fate and global distribution of polychlorinated biphenyls. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol, 2009. 201: p. 137–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Xue J, et al. , Analysis of NHANES measured blood PCBs in the general US population and application of SHEDS model to identify key exposure factors. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 2014. 24(6): p. 615–621. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Huang W, et al. , Risk of breast cancer and adipose tissue concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls and organochlorine pesticides: a hospital-based case-control study in Chinese women. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int, 2019. 26(31): p. 32128–32136. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Leng L, et al. , Polychlorinated biphenyls and breast cancer: A congener-specific meta-analysis. Environ Int, 2016. 88: p. 133–141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Cohn BA, et al. , Exposure to polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners measured shortly after giving birth and subsequent risk of maternal breast cancer before age 50. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2012. 136(1): p. 267–75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Liu S, Li S, and Du Y, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Enhance Metastatic Properties of Breast Cancer Cells by Activating Rho-Associated Kinase (ROCK). PLOS ONE, 2010. 5(6): p. e11272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Silkworth JB and Antrim L, Relationship between Ah receptor-mediated polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)-induced humoral immunosuppression and thymic atrophy. J Pharmacol Exp Ther, 1985. 235(3): p. 606–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Andersson PL, et al. , Assessment of PCBs and hydroxylated PCBs as potential xenoestrogens: In vitro studies based on MCF-7 cell proliferation and induction of vitellogenin in primary culture of rainbow trout hepatocytes. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol, 1999. 37(2): p. 145–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Ludewig G, et al. , Metabolic Activation of PCBs to Carcinogens in Vivo - A Review. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol, 2008. 25(2): p. 241–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Qin Q, et al. , Polychlorinated biphenyl quinone exposure promotes breast cancer aerobic glycolysis: An in vitro and in vivo examination. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2022. 424: p. 127512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Mitra SK and Schlaepfer DD, Integrin-regulated FAK-Src signaling in normal and cancer cells. Curr Opin Cell Biol, 2006. 18(5): p. 516–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Zhao H, et al. , Glucose Transporter 1 Promotes the Malignant Phenotype of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer through Integrin β1/Src/FAK Signaling. J Cancer, 2019. 10(20): p. 4989–4997. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Shan Q, et al. , Understanding the Multiple Effects of PCBs on Lipid Metabolism. Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy, 2020. 13: p. 3691–3702. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Li S, et al. , Understanding mixed environmental exposures using metabolomics via a hierarchical community network model in a cohort of California women in 1960’s. Reprod Toxicol, 2020. 92: p. 57–65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Shan Q, et al. , Understanding the Multiple Effects of PCBs on Lipid Metabolism. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes, 2020. 13: p. 3691–3702. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Wójtowicz AK, et al. , Effects of two isomers of DDT and their metabolite DDE on CYP1A1 and AhR function in human placental cells. Pharmacol Rep, 2011. 63(6): p. 1460–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Fang C, et al. , PFOS elicits transcriptional responses of the ER, AHR and PPAR pathways in Oryzias melastigma in a stage-specific manner. Aquat Toxicol, 2012. 106–107: p. 9–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Esposito K, et al. , Effect of metabolic syndrome and its components on prostate cancer risk: Meta-analysis. Journal of Endocrinological Investigation, 2013. 36(2): p. 132–139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Wulaningsih W, et al. , Serum Lipids and the Risk of Gastrointestinal Malignancies in the Swedish AMORIS Study. Journal of Cancer Epidemiology, 2012. 2012: p. 792034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Radišauskas R, et al. , Hypertension, serum lipids and cancer risk: A review of epidemiological evidence. Medicina, 2016. 52(2): p. 89–98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Marino N, et al. , Upregulation of lipid metabolism genes in the breast prior to cancer diagnosis. npj Breast Cancer, 2020. 6(1): p. 50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Madak-Erdogan Z, et al. , Free Fatty Acids Rewire Cancer Metabolism in Obesity-Associated Breast Cancer via Estrogen Receptor and mTOR Signaling. Cancer Res, 2019. 79(10): p. 2494–2510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Blücher C and Stadler SC, Obesity and Breast Cancer: Current Insights on the Role of Fatty Acids and Lipid Metabolism in Promoting Breast Cancer Growth and Progression. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 2017. 8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Fenton SE, Endocrine-disrupting compounds and mammary gland development: early exposure and later life consequences. Endocrinology, 2006. 147(6 Suppl): p. S18–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Verner MA, et al. , A case study addressing the reliability of polychlorinated biphenyl levels measured at the time of breast cancer diagnosis in representing early-life exposure. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2011. 20(2): p. 281–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Rudel RA, et al. , Environmental exposures and mammary gland development: state of the science, public health implications, and research recommendations. Environ Health Perspect, 2011. 119(8): p. 1053–61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Burridge E, Bisphenol A: product profile. Eur Chem News, 2003. 17: p. 14–20. [Google Scholar]
- 99.Vandenberg LN, et al. , Human exposure to bisphenol A (BPA). Reproductive Toxicology, 2007. 24(2): p. 139–177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Moon MK, Concern about the Safety of Bisphenol A Substitutes. Diabetes Metab J, 2019. 43(1): p. 46–48. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Stillwater BJ, et al. , Bisphenols and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review of the Impact of Diet and Bioactive Food Components. Frontiers in Nutrition, 2020. 7(245). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Acevedo N, et al. , Perinatally administered bisphenol a as a potential mammary gland carcinogen in rats. Environ Health Perspect, 2013. 121(9): p. 1040–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Weber Lozada K and Keri RA, Bisphenol A increases mammary cancer risk in two distinct mouse models of breast cancer. Biol Reprod, 2011. 85(3): p. 490–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Dontu G and Ince TA, Of mice and women: a comparative tissue biology perspective of breast stem cells and differentiation. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia, 2015. 20(1–2): p. 51–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Tharp AP, et al. , Bisphenol A alters the development of the rhesus monkey mammary gland. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2012. 109(21): p. 8190–8195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Cabaton NJ, et al. , An Untargeted Metabolomics Approach to Investigate the Metabolic Modulations of HepG2 Cells Exposed to Low Doses of Bisphenol A and 17β-Estradiol. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 2018. 9(571). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Wei Z, et al. , Metabolism of Amino Acids in Cancer. Front Cell Dev Biol, 2020. 8: p. 603837. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108.Ren L, et al. , Apolipoproteins and cancer. Cancer Med, 2019. 8(16): p. 7032–7043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109.Lin Y, et al. , Downregulation of miR-192 causes hepatic steatosis and lipid accumulation by inducing SREBF1: Novel mechanism for bisphenol A-triggered non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular and Cell Biology of Lipids, 2017. 1862(9): p. 869–882. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110.Zhao H, et al. , Dose-response metabolomics and pathway sensitivity to map molecular cartography of bisphenol A exposure. Environ Int, 2022. 158: p. 106893. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111.Liu M, et al. , Metabolomic and Transcriptomic Analysis of MCF-7 Cells Exposed to 23 Chemicals at Human-Relevant Levels: Estimation of Individual Chemical Contribution to Effects. Environ Health Perspect, 2020. 128(12): p. 127008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112.Zhao C, et al. , Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based metabolomics and lipidomics reveal toxicological mechanisms of bisphenol F in breast cancer xenografts. J Hazard Mater, 2018. 358: p. 503–507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113.Loft S and Poulsen HE, Cancer risk and oxidative DNA damage in man. J Mol Med (Berl), 1996. 74(6): p. 297–312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114.Huang W, et al. , Integration of proteomics and metabolomics reveals promotion of proliferation by exposure of bisphenol S in human breast epithelial MCF-10A cells. Science of The Total Environment, 2020. 712: p. 136453. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115.Zhao C, et al. , Metabolic perturbation, proliferation and reactive oxygen species jointly contribute to cytotoxicity of human breast cancer cell induced by tetrabromo and tetrachloro bisphenol A. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 2019. 170: p. 495–501. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116.Reeves KW, et al. , Urinary Phthalate Biomarker Concentrations and Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Risk. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2019. 111(10): p. 1059–1067. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117.Wu AH, et al. , Urinary phthalate exposures and risk of breast cancer: the Multiethnic Cohort study. Breast Cancer Research, 2021. 23(1): p. 44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118.Chen FP and Chien MH, Lower concentrations of phthalates induce proliferation in human breast cancer cells. Climacteric, 2014. 17(4): p. 377–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119.Xue F and Michels KB, Diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and breast cancer: a review of the current evidence. Am J Clin Nutr, 2007. 86(3): p. s823–35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120.James-Todd TM, et al. , The association between phthalates and metabolic syndrome: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2001–2010. Environmental Health, 2016. 15(1): p. 52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121.Ayed Y, et al. , In vitro and in vivo induction of chromosome aberrations by alpha- and beta-zearalenols: Comparison with zearalenone. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, 2011. 726(1): p. 42–46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122.Sun D, et al. , Determination of Trace Zearalenone and Its Metabolites in Human Serum by a High-Throughput UPLC-MS/MS Analysis. Applied Sciences, 2019. 9(4): p. 741. [Google Scholar]
- 123.Matraszek-Zuchowska I, Wozniak B, and Zmudzki J, Determination of zeranol, taleranol, zearalanone, α-zearalenol, β-zearalenol and zearalenone in urine by LC-MS/MS. Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess, 2013. 30(6): p. 987–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124.Lindsay DG, Zeranol--a ‘nature-identical’ oestrogen? Food Chem Toxicol, 1985. 23(8): p. 767–74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125.Tatay E, et al. , Estrogenic activity of zearalenone, α-zearalenol and β-zearalenol assessed using the E-screen assay in MCF-7 cells. Toxicol Mech Methods, 2018. 28(4): p. 239–242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126.Leffers H, et al. , Oestrogenic potencies of Zeranol, oestradiol, diethylstilboestrol, Bisphenol-A and genistein: implications for exposure assessment of potential endocrine disrupters. Hum Reprod, 2001. 16(5): p. 1037–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127.Bandera EV, et al. , Urinary mycoestrogens, body size and breast development in New Jersey girls. Sci Total Environ, 2011. 409(24): p. 5221–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128.Rivera-Núñez Z, et al. , Urinary mycoestrogens and age and height at menarche in New Jersey girls. Environmental Health, 2019. 18(1): p. 24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129.Belhassen H, et al. , Zearalenone and its metabolites in urine and breast cancer risk: a case-control study in Tunisia. Chemosphere, 2015. 128: p. 1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130.Withanage GS, et al. , Agonistic and antagonistic effects of zearalenone, an etrogenic mycotoxin, on SKN, HHUA, and HepG2 human cancer cell lines. Vet Hum Toxicol, 2001. 43(1): p. 6–10. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.Liu S and Lin YC, Transformation of MCF-10A human breast epithelial cells by zeranol and estradiol-17beta. Breast J, 2004. 10(6): p. 514–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132.Yuri T, et al. , Biphasic effects of zeranol on the growth of estrogen receptor-positive human breast carcinoma cells. Oncol Rep, 2006. 16(6): p. 1307–12. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133.Xu P, et al. , Mitogenic activity of zeranol in human breast cancer cells is enhanced by leptin and suppressed by gossypol. Anticancer Res, 2009. 29(11): p. 4621–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134.Xu P, et al. , Zeranol enhances leptin-induced proliferation in primary cultured human breast cancer epithelial cells. Mol Med Rep, 2010. 3(5): p. 795–800. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135.Sheffield LG and Welsch CW, Zeranol (beta-resorcylic acid lactone), a common residous component of natural foodstuffs, stimulates developmental growth of the mouse mammary gland. Cancer Lett, 1985. 28(1): p. 77–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136.Zhong S, et al. , Zeranol induces cell proliferation and protein disulfide isomerase expression in mammary gland of ACI rat. Anticancer Res, 2011. 31(5): p. 1659–65. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137.Liehr JG, Is estradiol a genotoxic mutagenic carcinogen? Endocr Rev, 2000. 21(1): p. 40–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138.Felty Q, et al. , Estrogen-induced mitochondrial reactive oxygen species as signal-transducing messengers. Biochemistry, 2005. 44(18): p. 6900–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139.Gould KA, et al. , Genetic determination of susceptibility to estrogen-induced mammary cancer in the ACI rat: mapping of Emca1 and Emca2 to chromosomes 5 and 18. Genetics, 2004. 168(4): p. 2113–25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140.Das Gupta S, et al. , Differential Gene Regulation and Tumor-Inhibitory Activities of Alpha-, Delta-, and Gamma-Tocopherols in Estrogen-Mediated Mammary Carcinogenesis. Cancer Prev Res (Phila), 2017. 10(12): p. 694–703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141.Tatay E, Font G, and Ruiz M-J, Cytotoxic effects of zearalenone and its metabolites and antioxidant cell defense in CHO-K1 cells. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2016. 96: p. 43–49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142.Nittoli AC, et al. , Effects of α-zearalenol on the metabolome of two breast cancer cell lines by 1H-NMR approach. Metabolomics, 2018. 14(3): p. 33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143.Glunde K, Bhujwalla ZM, and Ronen SM, Choline metabolism in malignant transformation. Nature Reviews Cancer, 2011. 11(12): p. 835–848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144.Grinde MT, et al. , Interplay of choline metabolites and genes in patient-derived breast cancer xenografts. Breast Cancer Research, 2014. 16(1): p. R5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145.Cabaton NJ, et al. , Effects of low doses of bisphenol A on the metabolome of perinatally exposed CD-1 mice. Environ Health Perspect, 2013. 121(5): p. 586–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146.Zhou M, et al. , Metabolomic Markers of Phthalate Exposure in Plasma and Urine of Pregnant Women. Frontiers in Public Health, 2018. 6(298). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147.Zani C, et al. , Polychlorinated biphenyl serum levels, thyroid hormones and endocrine and metabolic diseases in people living in a highly polluted area in North Italy: A population-based study. Heliyon, 2019. 5(6): p. e01870. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 148.Wang Y, Zhu H, and Kannan K, A Review of Biomonitoring of Phthalate Exposures. Toxics, 2019. 7(2): p. 21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149.Rivera-Núñez Z, et al. , Urinary mycoestrogens and age and height at menarche in New Jersey girls. Environ Health, 2019. 18(1): p. 24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 150.Cobellis L, et al. , Measurement of bisphenol A and bisphenol B levels in human blood sera from healthy and endometriotic women. Biomed Chromatogr, 2009. 23(11): p. 1186–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151.Song H, et al. , Low doses of bisphenol A stimulate the proliferation of breast cancer cells via ERK1/2/ERRγ signals. Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA, 2015. 30 1 Pt B: p. 521–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 152.Qin X-Y, et al. , Effects of bisphenol A exposure on the proliferation and senescence of normal human mammary epithelial cells. Cancer Biology & Therapy, 2012. 13: p. 296–306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 153.Oakley GG, et al. , Oxidative DNA damage induced by activation of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): implications for PCB-induced oxidative stress in breast cancer. Chemical research in toxicology, 1996. 9 8: p. 1285–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 154.Liu S and Lin YC, Transformation of MCF‐10A Human Breast Epithelial Cells by Zeranol and Estradiol‐17β. The Breast Journal, 2004. 10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 155.Liu S, Li S, and Du Y, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Enhance Metastatic Properties of Breast Cancer Cells by Activating Rho-Associated Kinase (ROCK). PLoS ONE, 2010. 5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 156.Kim J-Y, et al. , Effects of bisphenol compounds on the growth and epithelial mesenchymal transition of MCF-7 CV human breast cancer cells. Journal of Biomedical Research, 2017. 31: p. 358–369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157.Kim H, Kim HS, and Moon WK, Comparison of transcriptome expression alterations by chronic exposure to low-dose bisphenol A in different subtypes of breast cancer cells. Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 2019: p. 114814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 158.Hsieh TH, et al. , Phthalates induce proliferation and invasiveness of estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer through the AhR/HDAC6/c-Myc signaling pathway. Faseb j, 2012. 26(2): p. 778–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 159.Hsieh T-H, et al. , n-Butyl Benzyl Phthalate Promotes Breast Cancer Progression by Inducing Expression of Lymphoid Enhancer Factor 1. PLoS ONE, 2012. 7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 160.Fernandez SV, et al. , Expression and DNA methylation changes in human breast epithelial cells after bisphenol A exposure. International journal of oncology, 2012. 41 1: p. 369–77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 161.Chen FP and Chien MH, Lower concentrations of phthalates induce proliferation in human breast cancer cells. Climacteric, 2014. 17(4): p. 377–384. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
