Skip to main content
PMC home page
Environmental Health Perspectives logoLink to Environmental Health Perspectives
. 2000 Oct;108(10):983–987. doi: 10.1289/ehp.00108983

Prediction and assessment of the effects of mixtures of four xenoestrogens.

J Payne 1, N Rajapakse 1, M Wilkins 1, A Kortenkamp 1
PMCID: PMC1240133  PMID: 11049820

Abstract

The assessment of mixture effects of estrogenic agents is regarded as an issue of high priority by many governmental agencies and expert decision-making bodies all over the world. However, the few mixture studies published so far have suffered from conceptual and experimental problems and are considered to be inconclusive. Here, we report the results of assessments of two-, three- and four-component mixtures of o,p'-DDT, genistein, 4-nonylphenol, and 4-n-octylphenol, all compounds with well-documented estrogenic activity. Extensive concentration-response analyses with the single agents were carried out using a recombinant yeast screen (yeast estrogen screen, YES). Based on the activity of the single agents in the YES assay we calculated predictions of entire concentration-response curves for mixtures of our chosen test agents assuming additive combination effects. For this purpose we employed the models of concentration addition and independent action, both well-established models for the calculation of mixture effects. Experimental concentration-response analyses revealed good agreement between predicted and observed mixture effects in all cases. Our results show that the combined effect of o,p'-DDT, genistein, 4-nonylphenol, and 4-n-octylphenol in the YES assay does not deviate from expected additivity. We consider both reference models as useful tools for the assessment of combination effects of multiple mixtures of xenoestrogens.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (99.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Andersen H. R., Andersson A. M., Arnold S. F., Autrup H., Barfoed M., Beresford N. A., Bjerregaard P., Christiansen L. B., Gissel B., Hummel R. Comparison of short-term estrogenicity tests for identification of hormone-disrupting chemicals. Environ Health Perspect. 1999 Feb;107 (Suppl 1):89–108. doi: 10.1289/ehp.99107s189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnold S. F., Robinson M. K., Notides A. C., Guillette L. J., Jr, McLachlan J. A. A yeast estrogen screen for examining the relative exposure of cells to natural and xenoestrogens. Environ Health Perspect. 1996 May;104(5):544–548. doi: 10.1289/ehp.96104544. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Berenbaum M. C. What is synergy? Pharmacol Rev. 1989 Jun;41(2):93–141. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Beresford N., Routledge E. J., Harris C. A., Sumpter J. P. Issues arising when interpreting results from an in vitro assay for estrogenic activity. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2000 Jan 1;162(1):22–33. doi: 10.1006/taap.1999.8817. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Coldham N. G., Dave M., Sivapathasundaram S., McDonnell D. P., Connor C., Sauer M. J. Evaluation of a recombinant yeast cell estrogen screening assay. Environ Health Perspect. 1997 Jul;105(7):734–742. doi: 10.1289/ehp.97105734. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Gaido K. W., Leonard L. S., Lovell S., Gould J. C., Babaï D., Portier C. J., McDonnell D. P. Evaluation of chemicals with endocrine modulating activity in a yeast-based steroid hormone receptor gene transcription assay. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1997 Mar;143(1):205–212. doi: 10.1006/taap.1996.8069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Greco W. R., Bravo G., Parsons J. C. The search for synergy: a critical review from a response surface perspective. Pharmacol Rev. 1995 Jun;47(2):331–385. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kortenkamp A., Altenburger R. Approaches to assessing combination effects of oestrogenic environmental pollutants. Sci Total Environ. 1999 Aug 15;233(1-3):131–140. doi: 10.1016/s0048-9697(99)00228-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Kortenkamp A., Altenburger R. Synergisms with mixtures of xenoestrogens: a reevaluation using the method of isoboles. Sci Total Environ. 1998 Sep 29;221(1):59–73. doi: 10.1016/s0048-9697(98)00261-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Reiter L. W., DeRosa C., Kavlock R. J., Lucier G., Mac M. J., Melillo J., Melnick R. L., Sinks T., Walton B. T. The U.S. federal framework for research on endocrine disruptors and an analysis of research programs supported during fiscal year 1996. Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Mar;106(3):105–113. doi: 10.1289/ehp.98106105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sharpe R. M., Skakkebaek N. E. Are oestrogens involved in falling sperm counts and disorders of the male reproductive tract? Lancet. 1993 May 29;341(8857):1392–1395. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)90953-e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Toppari J., Larsen J. C., Christiansen P., Giwercman A., Grandjean P., Guillette L. J., Jr, Jégou B., Jensen T. K., Jouannet P., Keiding N. Male reproductive health and environmental xenoestrogens. Environ Health Perspect. 1996 Aug;104 (Suppl 4):741–803. doi: 10.1289/ehp.96104s4741. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Wolff M. S., Weston A. Breast cancer risk and environmental exposures. Environ Health Perspect. 1997 Jun;105 (Suppl 4):891–896. doi: 10.1289/ehp.97105s4891. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Yang R. S. Some critical issues and concerns related to research advances on toxicology of chemical mixtures. Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Aug;106 (Suppl 4):1059–1063. doi: 10.1289/ehp.98106s41059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Environmental Health Perspectives are provided here courtesy of National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

RESOURCES