Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, University of
Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
Abstract
Recently, significant concerns have been placed on the widespread use of chemicals with persistent estrogenic activity for their long-term effects on human health. In this communication, we investigated whether fetal exposure to some of these chemicals at doses consumed by people, has any long-term effect on the reproductive functions of the male offspring. Thus, time-pregnant CD-1 mice were fed diethylstilbestrol (DES), bisphenol A (BPA), and aroclor (aroclor 1016) at an average concentration of 100 ng/kg/day, 50 ΅g/kg/day, and 50 ΅g/kg/day, respectively, during Days 1618 of gestation. A high dose of DES (200 ΅g/kg/day) was also tested to compare the results of the current study with those of others using the high dose only. The offspring were examined at Day 3, Day 21, and Day 60 following birth. We demonstrated that BPA, aroclor, and the lower dose of DES enhanced anogenital distance, increased prostate size, and decreased epididymal weight. No effect was found on the testicular weight or size. The chemicals also permanently increased androgen receptor (AR) binding activity of the prostate at this dosage. This is the first demonstration that environmental chemicals program AR function permanently at the dosage consumed by the general population. The higher dosage of DES, on the other hand, produced an opposite effect, decreasing prostate weight, prostate AR binding, and anogenital distance, thus confirming the previous reports. To investigate whether the above mentioned effects of the chemicals represent direct or indirect effects, we also tested the effect of the chemicals on prostate development in vitro. Thus fetal urogenital sinus (UGS), isolated at the 17th day of gestation was cultured with the chemicals in the presence and absence of testosterone (10 ng/ml) for 6 days, and prostate growth was monitored by determining the size and branching of the specimen following histology. Results showed that these chemicals induced prostate growth in the presence and absence of testosterone. They also increased androgen-binding activity. Thus, the results of the in vivo studies were reproduced in the in vitro experiments, suggesting a direct effect of these chemicals on the development of fetal reproductive organs. This is the first demonstration that estrogenic chemicals induce reproductive malformation by direct interference with the fetal reproductive organs and not by interfering with the maternal or fetal endocrine system. The chemicals are able to induce malformation even in the absence of fetal testosterone; however, they are more effective in the presence of testosterone.
Introduction
Use of chemicals with mild but persistent estrogenic activity has increased significantly in our lives. Everyday household products, namely, pesticides, components of plastics, detergents, hand creams, and birth control pills are the source of such activity (1-4). There is some evidence that inappropriate exposure to estrogens in man as in animals can cause abnormal male reproductive functions, such as, lower sperm production, prostatic hyperplasia, and testicular cancer (5-7). However, little is known about the effect of the estrogenic chemicals on the developing organism at the dosage that is consumed by people in their daily lives. Recently, it has been shown that an increase in estrogen level by only 0.1 pg/ml in the fetal mouse induces permanent enhancement in prostate size and androgen action (8). This prompted us to determine the effect of some of the commonly used estrogenic chemicals on the development of the fetal mouse reproductive system using the dosage that falls within the environmental level of these chemicals approved by the FDA. Bisphenol A (BPA, 2,2-bis [4-hydroxyphenyl] propane) is one such compound that is used to line food and drink cans (9,10). Bisphenol A is also a component of plastic used in dental fillings, which are often used to protect teeth in children (11). A significant amount of BPA is released from these commonly used products (9), the level of which (2040 ΅g/kg) was shown to have estrogen-like activity when tested on the MCF7 cells (12). Some of the polyclorinated biphenols (PCB) also showed estrogenic activity (13,14). A high concentration of these chemicals is found in the environment of the big cities. As an example, a high concentration of PCB was found in the soil and air of the National Priorities landfill of Southern Illinois (13). Both soil (346 mg PCB/kg) and air (175 mg PCB/kg) extracts of this landfill caused a greater than 30% increase in uterine wet weight, suggesting presence of an estrogen-like effect in the extract (13). In this study, we tested the effect of three such environmental estrogenic products, namely, BPA, aroclor 1016 (a PCB product), and a very low dose of diethylstilbestrol (DES) for their effect on the development of male reproductive functions. Additionally, we examined whether these chemicals have a direct effect on the developing fetus by determining the effect of these chemicals on the fetal prostate grown in vitro. The results showed that environmental levels of all these chemicals had a profound effect on the developing reproductive functions. The effects were permanent and produced by direct interaction of the chemicals on the developing organs.
Materials and Methods
Animals.
Time-pregnant CD-1 mice were purchased from the Charles River breeding
laboratory (Wilmington, MA). The animals were received on the
12th day of gestation counting the day of breeding as Day 0
of gestation, and they were used in the experiments on the
16th day of gestation. The animals were maintained on Purina Chow-5
L9 diet in the Charles River Laboratory, and they were maintained
on Purina Chow 5012 diet in our institute. Pregnant mice were
fed different chemicals or vehicle in 25 ΅l of corn oil
containing 10% ethanol at Days 1618 (critical period of
prostate development) of gestation as indicated in the text.
Following delivery, each litter was adjusted to contain eight
offspring (at least three of which were male) so that maternal
nutritional effect remained constant in different litters. An
equal number of offspring (1-3) was
pooled from each litter in a group to compare the results
from one group with the other. The offspring were weighed;
their anogenital distance was measured; and the weight of
different reproductive organs was assessed. To determine
androgen function of the prostate, androgen binding was
assessed as described in a later section.
For examination of prostate growth, whole tissue mount was prepared from the 15-day-old offspring. In brief, the entire prostate tissue was stripped off of the urethra with the aid of a dissecting microscope. The extraneous fibrous tissue and bladder were removed. The tissue was then carefully stretched onto filter paper, which was immediately immersed in 10% formalin in normal saline until ready for staining. The filter papers with the tissue were transferred to 70% ethanol overnight and then exposed to alcoholic toluidine blue (0.5 g in 20% ethanol) for 1530 sec. The excess stain was rinsed off in water. The samples were taken in a stepwise fashion to absolute ethanol and then to xylene. After overnight exposure to xylene, the tissues were mounted in parmount.
Organ Culture of Prostate.
Fetal UGS was microdissected from the junction of bladder and urethra
at the 17th day of gestation (onset of prostate development). The
organ culture assay of prostate development was carried out
as described for rat prostate (15). In brief,
stainless steel grids were placed inside the 60-mm organ
culture Falcon Petri dishes (Miles Plastics, Oxnard, CA). A
strip of 1% Difco Agar (3 mm thick, 45 mm long, and 10 mm
wide) was placed on the grid. The UGS and its ventral
prostatic region was placed on the surface of agar, and
dye-free culture medium [Dulbecco's modified eagle medium (DMEM)
and DMEM-F-12 1:1] was added in the culture dish. Serum was
not used, but insulin and transferrin were added, each at 10
΅g/ml, into the medium. The chemicals were added as
described in the text, and the medium was changed every other
day. To mimic the in vivo condition of testicular testosterone,
the chemicals were tested in the presence of physiological levels
of testosterone in some experiments. The culture dishes were
then placed in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator and incubated
at 37°C with various agents. On Day 7, the cultures were terminated,
and the organs were fixed in Bouin's solution for 4 hr, then
transferred into 70% alcohol and finally transferred into 20%
sucrose-PBS buffer and allowed to equilibrate for 20 hr each
time. The fixed tissue was then used for histologic sectioning
as described below.
Histology and Assessment of Prostate Differentiation In
Vitro.
The histology of the prostate from the organ culture experiments was
performed as described earlier (15). In brief, the
fixed tissue specimens were placed in Tissue-Tek OCT (Miles,
Elkhart, IN) and frozen at -70°C. Ten-micrometer sections
were cut transversely along the urethra using an AO histostat
microtome (International Equipment Company, Needham Heights,
MA) and stained with hematoxylin and eosin. All serial
sections of the specimen were examined, and
branching-appearance as well as the size of the specimen were
monitored. On the average, each specimen produced 6070
sections, and usually, one of the 30th to 35th sections
provided full details of the organ development. This section
was used in determining the size and branching, shown in
tables and figures. The size of the specimen was determined by
calibrated micrometer disc attached to the microscope.
Preparation of Prostate Cells and Determination of Androgen
Binding Using the Cell Preparation.
Prostates were isolated at Day 3, Day 21, and Day 60 of age in
RPMI 1640 medium and used in isolating cells as described elsewhere
(16). Two to six prostates were pooled per isolation,
depending on age of the offspring. The tissues were transferred
to 1 ml of F-12 medium containing 10% fetal calf serum and minced
into small pieces. Collagenase (type 1, Sigma, St. Louis, MO)
was added at a concentration of 3 mg/ml, and the mixture was incubated
at 37°C for 45 min with constant shaking. At the end, the
cells were dislodged from the clumps by pipetting in and out.
The undissociated cellular clumps were removed by allowing the
mixture to settle for 5 sec and removing the cell suspension from
the top. The collagenase treatment was repeated using the undissociated
sediment, and the cell suspension from the two steps of
isolation was combined. The cells were centrifuged at 1000x
RPM, and the pellet was washed with 10 ml of the F-12 medium.
The cell viability of the preparation ranged from 75%85%. The
mixture contained two types of small round cells (possibly muscle
and stroma cells) and large multinucleated cells (epithelial cells).
Androgen binding was measured using the prostate cell preparation as described previously (17). In brief, the cells (105 cells/tube) were mixed with mibolerone (17a-methyl-3H, 84 Ci/mmol, Dupont-NEN, Boston, MA) at a concentration of 0.11 nM for 1 hr in the presence and absence of 1 ΅M unlabeled Mibolerone (Dupont-NEN, Boston, MA) in 1 ml of DMEM containing 0.1% BSA. The mixtures were incubated for 1 hr at 37°C in a shaking incubator. The reaction was stopped adding 500 ΅l of cold DMEM medium. The unbound steroid was removed by washing the cells with DMEM three times. The cells were transferred into scintillation vials to determine the bound radioactivity. The binding data were analyzed by a program, called EBDA (18). The files produced from this analysis were analyzed by a second program called LIGAND (18). Scatchard plots were generated, and the total number of binding sites and dissociation constant were calculated from the plots.
Experimental Plan and Data Analysis.
The number of offspring was adjusted to eight per litter, each containing
at least three males. Fifteen litters were assigned for each
treatment. For determining organ weight and biochemical analysis,
15 offspring (1 from each of the 15 litters) were used for
each time point. For body weight and anogenital distance, 45
animals (3 from each of the 15 litters) were examined at Day
3, 30 animals (2 from each of the 15 litters) were examined at
Day 21, and 15 animals (1 from each of the 15 litters) were examined
at Day 60. The data were tested by ANOVA to determine statistical
significance.
Results
Effect of Prenatal Exposure to the Estrogenic Chemicals on the
Development of External Genitalia.
To investigate whether the estrogenic chemicals modulate
androgen-dependent development, we first examined the
anogenital distance of the male offspring that had been
exposed to these chemicals prenatally. Thus, CD-1 pregnant
mice (15 in each group) were fed different doses of BPA,
aroclor, DES, or vehicle as described in the Materials and
Methods section. The doses of these chemicals were chosen based
on the environmental level of these chemicals (9-14)
that is considered safe by the FDA. Thus, BPA and aroclor
were fed to the CD-1 pregnant mice at 50 ΅g/kg. Since DES
was shown to have 100-fold higher estrogen activity compared
with BPA, DES was fed only at 100 ng/kg dosage. A higher dose
of DES (200 ΅g/kg) was also examined to compare the current
findings with those reported elsewhere (6).
The offspring were examined for the development of anogenital
distance using a micrometer. None of the chemicals induced
fetal resorption or affected litter size (Gupta C,
unpublished data). As shown in Table I,
these chemicals, except a high dose of DES, produced no
effect on the body weight. However, all of these chemicals,
including a low dose of DES, enlarged anogenital distance of
the male offspring, especially at the adult period (Table I).
The anogenital distance results, shown in Table I,
were corrected against the body weight; however, the
uncorrected values also showed similar effects of different
chemicals (Gupta C, unpublished data). DES at high dosage, on
the other hand, decreased body weight and anogenital distance
(Table I),
thus confirming some of the previous findings with DES (6).
These chemicals produced no effect on the anogenital distance
of the female offspring (unpublished data), suggesting that
the effects may be associated with modulation of
androgen-induced effects.
Table I. Effect of Prenatal Exposure to Estrogenic Chemicals on Anogenital Distance (AG) of the Male Offspring
Day 3 Day 21 Day 60
Dosage Body wt AG Body wt AG Body wt AG
Drug (ng/g) (g) (mm/kg) (g) (mm/kg) (g) (mm/kg)
None 1.8±0.1 1777±55 15±2.2 466±26 39±2.3 474±13
DES 0.1 1.6±0.1 2375±66a 16±2.5 512±25a 34±3.3 600±32a
200.00 1.4±0.2b 1561±114b 15±1.7 413±33b 29±3.6b 406±39b
BPA 50.00 1.7±0.2 2176±176a 16±2.6 582±43a 32±1.5 631±41a
Aroclor 50.00 1.8±0.2 2222±277a 17±3.2 617±64a 35±2.6 634±60a
Note. Data represent mean ± SD, n = 15 to 45; aP < 0.05 (larger) compared with the
vehicle control; bP < 0.05 (smaller) compared with the vehicle control by ANOVA
test. AG, anogenital distance. Forty-five offspring were examined in each group
at Day 3; 30 offspring at Day 21, and 15 offspring at Day 60.
Effect of the Estrogenic Chemicals on the Development of Male
Internal Genital Organs.
The results described in the previous section demonstrated that the
estrogenic chemicals modulate development of external genitalia. This
prompted us to examine the effect of these chemicals on the
development of internal genital organs in the male offspring. As
shown in Table II,
all of these chemicals enhanced prostate weight but decreased
epididymal weight. No effect was observed on testicular and
vas deferens weight (Gupta C, unpublished data). Enhancement
of prostate weight by these chemicals was found even at age
3, but the effect was intensified when the offspring reached
the adult age (Table II).
Again, the organ weights, shown in Table II,
have been corrected for body weight; however, the uncorrected
values of the prostate and epididymal weight demonstrated
similar effects of the chemicals (Gupta C, unpublished data).
DES at a very low dosage increased prostate weight (Table II)
but at high dosage, it actually decreased the prostate weight
(Table II).
Table II. Effect of Estrogenic Chemicals on the Weight of Reproductive Organs of the Male Offspring
Prostate weight (mg/kg body weight) . Dosage Epididymis weight Drug (΅g/kg) Day 3 Day 21 Day 60 at day 60 (mg/kg) None 225±66 620±45 1020±210 1468±420 DES 0.1 310±45a 910±105a 1780±110a 1222±345 200.00 145±60b 410±62b 640±220b 645±210a BPA 50.0 350±51a 860±72a 2050±310a 952±333a Aroclor 50.0 295±55a 730±66a 1766±154a 710±420a Note. N = Average ± SD, n = 15 in each group. The data were analyzed by ANOVA test. The other symbols are defined under Table I.
A group of animals (four in each group) from each treatment group was also examined at 15 days of age to determine the prostate growth. As shown in Figure 1, the size of this gland was significantly increased in the offspring, which were exposed to these chemicals prenatally.
Figure 1. Effect of prenatal exposure to DES (100 ng/kg) and BPA (50 ΅g/kg) on prostate growth at 15 days of age. Four specimens from each group were analyzed, and a representative specimen from each group is shown in Figure 1. The arrow indicates the approximate region of urethral junction (UG) in different specimens.
Effect of the Estrogenic Chemicals on Androgen Binding.
The mechanism by which the estrogenic chemicals modulate the androgen-dependent
development is not known. One possibility is that they alter
androgen function by stimulating androgen receptor binding
activity. Previous studies with a low dose of estradiol
demonstrated enhancement of AR binding activity (8).
We examined whether these estrogenic chemicals induced similar
effects in the male offspring. Thus, AR binding activity was
determined in the cellular preparation of the prostate, isolated
at different ages of development from the offspring exposed
to the estrogenic chemicals prenatally. As shown in Figure 2,
all of these chemicals induced prostate AR binding activity.
The effect of aroclor was found as early as 3 days of age.
However, the effect was more pronounced when the offspring reached
puberty or adult age (Fig. 2).
No significant effect was noted in the dissociation constant
of the AR binding activity (Gupta C, unpublished data). DES
at high dosage significantly reduced AR binding activity
(Gupta C, unpublished data), thus confirming the findings of
other reports.
Figure 2. Effect of prenatal exposure to estrogenic chemicals on AR binding of the prostate gland at different ages. The data represent mean ± SD, n = 5; *P < 0.05 compared with the control by ANOVA. 10^-12 and 10^5 are the same as 10-12 and 105, respectively.
In Vitro Effect of Estrogenic Chemicals on Prostate
Growth.
In the above experiments, estrogenic chemicals were administered during
the prenatal period. This approach suffered from uncertainties about
the differential metabolism of these compounds in circulation and
binding to serum proteins in mothers, their transport through the
fetoplacental barrier, and the amounts of active substance reaching
fetal target tissues. Additionally, it was not known whether
the effect of these chemicals was mediated through a maternal
effect or whether they directly affected prostate development. To
answer these questions, we set up an organ culture assay using
fetal prostate gland isolated at the 17th day of gestation (onset
of prostate development) and determined the effect of estrogenic
chemicals. To investigate the effect under a physiological setup
of testicular testosterone, we also determined the effect of
these chemicals in the presence of physiological levels of testosterone,
and the results are shown in Table III.
As expected, testosterone enlarged prostate size and
increased glandular development and its branching (Table III
and Fig. 3).
A low dose of DES also enlarged the prostate size in the
absence of testosterone by increasing stromal growth but
produced no effect on branching (Table III,
Fig. 3).
The lumen size was also increased by DES exposure. DES
enhanced testosterone-induced prostate growth and branching,
causing reduction in the urethral lumen size (Table III,
Fig. 3).
The other two chemicals, BPA and aroclor, also induced
prostate growth and branching in the absence and presence of
testosterone (Table III
and Fig. 4).
DES also induced epithelial hyperplasia as seen in the insets
(Fig. 3),
but no such effect was observed using BPA and aroclor (Gupta
C, unpublished data). Thus, estrogenic chemicals modulate
prostate growth by acting directly on the developing
prostate.
Table III. Effect of Estrogenic Chemicals on Fetal Prostate Growth In Vitro
Prostate size (mm2)
Estrogens Dosage (pg/ml) In the absence of T In the presence of T
Vehicle .05±.01 (5) .08±.02 (9)b
DES 0.1 .08±.03 (4)a .15±.03 (5)c
0.5 .12±.04 (6)a .32±.07 (4)c
BPA 5.0 .04±.02 (4) .07±.01 (5)
50.0 .12±.06 (5)a .20±.12 (5)c
Aroclor 5.0 .03±.01 (4) .06±.01 (4)
50.0 .14±.04 (6)a .22±.12 (5)c
Note. Data represent mean ± SD; aP < 0.05 compared
with estrogen-untreated control. bP < 0.05 compared
with testosterone-untreated control by ANOVA test.
cP < 0.05 compared with testosterone-control by
ANOVA test. The number in the parenthesis indicates
the number of specimens examined.
Figure 3. Effect of testosterone and DES on prostate development in vitro. T, testosterone (10 ng/ml); DES (0.5), DES 0.5 pg/ml. One of the four to six specimens examined in each treatment group is presented here. Note enhancement of size and branching by testosterone but only size by DES (panel C). DES also enhanced the testosterone effect (panel D). The insets demonstrate the development of the epithelium in the region indicated by the arrow.
Figure 4. Effect of BPA (50 ng/ml) and Aroclor (50 ng/ml) on prostate development in vitro. C, control; T, testosterone. Note enhancement of size by BPA and aroclor both in the presence and absence of testosterone. One of the four to six specimens examined has been presented.
In Vitro Effect of Estrogenic Chemicals on AR Binding.
To further examine whether results from the in vitro experiments
represented those from in vivo experiments, we measured AR
binding activity of the cultured prostates. Thus, fetal
prostates at the 17th day of gestation were cultured with and
without the presence of different estrogenic chemicals. After
6 days of culture, cells were prepared from the cultured
prostates and used in the AR binding assay. One point assay
using only 1 nM of 3-H-mibilerone was used in this
instance, as sample size was too small to use for the entire
Scatchard analysis. As shown in Table IV,
all of these chemicals increased AR binding as compared with
vehicle-treated control cells. The finding was similar to the
in vivo treatment, although the values were slightly different.
Table IV. In Vitro Effect of the Estrogenic Chemicals on Androgen Binding of the Developing Prostate
Androgen binding Estrogens Dosage (pg/ml) Number (x10-12 M)/105 cells None 6 0.2±.12 DES 0.5 5 1.4±.32a BPA 50.0 4 0.6±.22a Aroclor 50.0 4 0.7±.26a Note. Data represent mean ± SD. aP < 0.05 by ANOVA test.
Discussion
Many synthetic chemicals can bind to the estrogen receptor and thereby affect specific gene expression and cellular function (19). These compounds are now referred to as xenoestrogens (9, 20, 21). The persistence of these compounds and their metabolites in the environment poses risks for both the human and animal population (22), and studies are necessary to estimate this risk. Although some reports have described endocrine-disruptive effects of these chemicals, there is a great deal of controversy on these findings (23). Additionally, the endocrine disruptive activity of DES and other estrogens has been described less conclusively in the male than in the female. Furthermore, studies are needed to determine whether environmental estrogenic chemicals induce developmental malformation at the dosage that is comparable to the human consumption level (9-13, 21). In this study we chose to determine the effect of three such environmental chemicals, namely, BPA, aroclor, and DES. All of these chemicals have estrogen-like activity (12, 21, 22) and are consumed by the human population (9-13). Using a dosage that is comparable to the human consumption level (11, 13), we evaluated the prenatal effect of these chemicals on male sexual differentiation in the mouse. We report that these chemicals permanently affected male sexual differentiation by increasing anogenital distance, inducing prostate growth and its AR binding activity, and reducing epididymal weight. At high dosage, on the other hand, DES produced an opposite effect, inducing hypospadius and inhibiting prostate growth and AR binding activity. Some of the results obtained with BPA and DES are consistent with previous findings (8, 24), suggesting a teratogenic role of these chemicals on the developing organism at the dosage that is accepted by the FDA. This study, in addition, evaluated the effects of prenatal exposure to estrogenic chemicals in a more detailed fashion. Thus, it examined the prenatal effect of a number of chemicals with low estrogenic activity and studied their effects at all developmental phases. The results demonstrated that all of these chemicals acted very similarly and altered development of certain reproductive organs and functions at all phases of development.
The result of the in vitro studies is the other strength of this research. To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration that estrogenic chemicals induce reproductive malformation in vitro, suggesting that the chemicals have a direct effect on prostate development. Both prostatic enlargement and increased AR binding activity were demonstrated in the developing prostate, grown in vitro in the presence of all of the estrogenic chemicals. Thus, the in vivo and in vitro effects are comparable and therefore, the in vitro setup can be used in further elucidation of the mechanism of estrogen action.
It is interesting to note that estrogenic chemicals induced abnormal male reproductive functions in the presence of large concentrations of maternal circulating estrogen, estradiol, estrone, and estriol. One explanation for this observation could be that the fetal estrogen level is very low in spite of maternal high levels of estrogen (25). During the gestational phase, the fetus is protected from the maternal high-estrogen level by placental conversion of the maternal estrogen into biologically inactive estrogen. Estrogens are inactivated either by converting into conjugated estrogen, forming inactive estrogen metabolite, or binding with plasma protein (26). Thus, even a small change in the estrogen level during this fetal period may have a significant effect, and our findings, especially the in vitro findings, support this possibility.
The mechanism by which these chemicals induce male reproductive malformations
is not known. The relatively low estrogenic potencies of
suspected endocrine disrupters suggest that estrogenic activity of
these chemicals alone is unlikely to produce adverse effects during
fetal development. Some suspected endocrine disrupters have
been shown to interact not only with the estrogen receptor (ER)
but also with the androgen receptor (AR) or to interfere with
steroid hormone synthesis or metabolism (27). At this
time it is not known whether estrogenic activity is directly
involved in the malformation induced by the chemicals.
Additionally, there are two ER subtypes, Era and Erb, in the
prostate (28). The xenoestrogens were
shown to have higher binding affinity for the ER-ί protein (29).
The role of these two ER subtypes in relation to the action
of these chemicals remains to be determined. The estrogenic
potency of compounds is another issue. Although the chemicals
are weak estrogens, the potency is dependent on a number of
factors, such as differential effects on the transactivation functionalities
of the receptor, the particular coactivator recruited and
cell and target gene promoter context (30, 31).
The apparently lower transcriptional activity of ER-ί compared
with ER-
has been reported in transient transfection experiments using
different cell lines (32). In contrast, in human
osteosarcoma or human endometrial cells, the transcriptional activity
of ER-ί was higher than that of ER-
(32). The reason for these differences in
transcriptional activity of ER subtypes is unknown, but it
might reflect differential expression of transcriptional
coactivators or differential stability of the receptor
proteins. At the present, it is not known whether any of the
ER-mediated activities are involved directly or whether these
chemicals alter recruitment of ER activators causing malformation of
the prostate gland.
The results described here demonstrate that AR binding activity is permanently altered by these chemicals. There are several possibilities of how this effect is mediated. First, it is possible that the estrogenic chemicals enhance synthesis of the AR protein resulting in enhanced activity. Second, the estrogenic chemicals may enhance recruitment of AR coactivators, resulting in enhanced AR binding. Finally, since these xenoestrogen-exposed offspring have enlarged prostate growth, it is also possible that AR-mediated transcriptional activity has been enhanced in these animals. This possibility is supported by the observations that estrogenic chemicals enhance EGF and IGF-1 synthesis in the adult uterus (33) and that EGF and IGF-1 enhance AR-mediated transcriptional activity (34,35). At this time it is not known whether these chemicals induce EGF/IGF-1 synthesis in the prostate gland mediating AR-mediated transcriptional activity and prostate growth. Further experiments are needed to examine these possibilities.
Footnotes
This work was supported in part by an NIH grant HD 27974.
1 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed at the Department of Pharmacology, E1340 Biomedical Science Tower, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. E-mail: gupt+@pitt.edu
References
Cooper RL, Kavlock RJ. Endocrine disruptors and reproductive development: A weight-of-evidence overview. J Endocrinol 152:159166, 1997.
Korach KS. Editorial: Surprising places of estrogenic activity. Endocrinology 132:22792286, 1993.
Chung L, Kozlowski JM, Grayhack JT. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors controlling benign prostatic growth. Prostate 31:131138, 1997.
Price KR, Fenwick GR. Naturally occurring estrogens in foods: A review. Food Addit Contam 2:73106, 1985.
Spearow JL, Doemeny P, Sera R, Leffler R, Barkley M. Genetic variation in susceptibility to endocrine disruption by estrogen in mice. Science 285:12591261, 1999.
Gill WH, Schumacher FB, Bibbo M, Straus FH, Schoenberg HW. Association of diethylstilbestrol exposure in utero with cryptorchidism, testicular hyperplasia, and semen abnormalities. J Urol 122:3639, 1979.
Santti R, Newbold RR, Makela S, Pylkkanen L, McLachlan JA. Developmental estrogenization and prostatic neoplasia. Prostate 24:6778, 1994.
Vom Saal FS, Timms BG, Montano MM, Palanza P, Thayer KA, Nagel SC, Dhar MD, Ganjan VK, Parmigiani S, Welshons WV. Prostate enlargement in mice due to fetal exposure to low doses of estradiol or diethylstilbestrol and opposite effects at high doses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:20562061, 1997.
Krishnan AV, Stathis P, Permuth SP, Tokes L, Feldman D. Bisphenol A: An estrogenic substance is released from polycarbonate flasks during autoclaving. Endocrinology 132:22792286, 1993.
Brotons JA, Olea-Serrano MF, Villalobos M, Pedraza V, Olea N. Xenoestrogens released from lacquer coating in food cans. Environ Health Perspect 103:608612, 1995.
Olea N, Pulgar R, Perez P, Olea-Serrano F, Rivas A, Novillo-Fertrell A, Pendraza V, Soto AM, Sonnenschein C. Estrogenicity of resin-based composites and sealants used in dentistry. Environ Health Perspect 104:298305, 1996.
Perez P, Pulgar R, Olea-Serrano F, Villalobos M, Rivas A, Metzler M, Pedraza V, Olea N. The estrogenicity of bisphenol Arelated diphenylalkanes with various substituents at the central carbon and the hydroxy groups. Environ Health Perspect 106:167174, 1998.
Li MH, Hansen LG. Enzyme induction and acute endocrine effects in prepubertal female rats receiving environmental PCB/PCDF/PCDD mixtures. Environ Health Perspect 104:712722, 1996.
Connor K, Ramamoorthy K, Moore M, Mustain M, Chen I, Safe S, Zacharewski T, Gillesby B, Joyeux A, Balaguer P. Hydroxylated polyclorinated biphenyls as estrogens and antiestrogens: Structure-activity relationships. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 145:111123, 1997.
Lipschutz JH, Foster BA, Cunha GR. Differentiation of rat ventral prostates grown in a serum-free organ culture system. Prostate 32:3542, 1997.
Itoh N, Patel U, Cupp AS, Skinner MK. Developmental and hormonal regulation of transforming growth factor-ί1 (TGF-ί1), -2, and -3 gene expression in isolated prostatic epithelial and stromal cells: Epidermal growth factor and TGF-ί interactions. Endocrinology 139:13781388, 1998.
Gupta C, Chandorkar A, Nguyen AP. Activation of androgen receptor in epidermal growth factor modulatrion of fetal mouse sexual differentiation. Mol Cell Endocrinol 123:8995, 1996.
McPherson GA. EBDA program. Available from Elsevier Biosoft, 68 Hills Rd, Cambridge, CB2 1LA, U.K., 1985.
Iguchi T. Cellular effects of early exposure to sex hormones and anti-hormones. Int Rev Cytol 139:15, 1992.
White R, Jobling S, Hoare SA, Sumpter JP, Parker MG. Environmentallly persistent alkylphenolic compounds are estrogenic. Endocrinology 135:175182, 1994.
Vom Saal FS, Cooke PS, Buchanon DL, Palanza P, Thayer KA, Nagel SC, Stefano P, Welshons WV. A physiologically based approach to the study of bisphenol A and other estrogenic chemicals on the size of reproductive organs, daily sperm production, and behavior. Toxicol Ind Health 14:239260, 1998.
Giusti RM, Iwamoto K, Hatch EE. Diethylstilbestrol revisited: A review of the long-term health effects. Ann Intern Med 122:778788, 1995.
Wilcox AJ, Baird DD, Weinberg CR, Hornsby PP, Herbst AL. Fertility in men exposed prenatally to diethylstilbestrol. N Engl J Med 332:14111416, 1995.
Nagel SC, Vom Saal FS, Thayer KA, Dhar MG, Boechlar M, Welshons WV. Relative binding affinity-serum modified access (RBA-SMA) assay predicts the relative in vivo bioactivity of the xenoestrogens bisphenol A and octylphenol. Environ Health Prospect 105:7076, 1997.
Gibori G, Sridaran R. Sites of androgen and estradiol production in the second half of pregnancy in the rat. Biol Reprod 24:249256, 1981.
Metzler M. Metabolic activation of xenobiotic stibene estrogens. Fed Proc 46:18551857, 1987.
LeBlanc GA, Bain LJ, Wilson VS. Pesticides: Multiple mechanisms of demasculinization. Mol Cell Endocrinol 126:15, 1997.
Prins GS, Marmer M, Woogham C, Chang W, Kuiper G, Gustafsson J, Birch L. Estrogen receptor-ί messenger ribonucleic acid ontogeny in the prostate of normal and neonatally estrogenized rats. Endocrinology 139:874883, 1998.
Anstead GM, Carlson KE, Katzenellenbogen JA. The estradiol pharmacophoe: Ligand structure-estrogen receptor binding affinity relationships and a model for the receptor binding site. Steroids 62:268303, 1997.
Brzozwski AM, Pike ACW, Dauter Z, Hubbard RE, Bonn T, Engstrom O, Ohman L, Greene GL, Gustafsson JA, Carlquist M. Molecular basis of agonism and antagonism in the estrogen receptor. Nature 389:753758, 1997.
Cowley SM, Hoare S, Mosselman S, Parker MG. Estrogen
receptor-
and -ί form heterodimers on DNA. J Biol Chem 272:1985819862,
1997.
Watanabe T, Inoue S, Ogawa S, Ishi Y, Hiroi H, Ikeda K,
Orimo A, Muramatsu M. Agonistic effect of tamoxifene is dependent on
cell type, ERE-promoter context and estrogen receptor subtype:
Functional difference between estrogen receptors-
and -ί. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 236:140145, 1997.
Ignar-Trowbridge DM, Pimentel M, Parker MG, McLachlan JA, Korach KS. Peptide growth factor cross-talk with the estrogen receptor requires the A/B domain and occurs independently of protein kinase C or estradiol. Endocrinology 137:17351744, 1996.
Gupta C. Modulation of androgen receptor (AR) -mediated transcriptional activity by EGF in the developing mouse reproductive tract. Mol Cell Endocrinol 152:169178, 1999.
Reinikainen P, Palvimo JJ, Janne OA. Effects of mitogens on androgen receptormediated transactivation. Endocrinology 137:43514357, 1996.
Received for publication June 24, 1999. Accepted for publication October 27, 1999.
This article has been cited by other articles:
Sheehan, D. M. (2000). Activity of Environmentally Relevant Low Doses of Endocrine Disruptors and the Bisphenol A Controversy: Initial Results Confirmed. PSEBM 224: 57-60
|
To
send us your comments, questions, and suggestions click
here |
