Literature DB >> 25091782

Evaluating chemical effects on mammary gland development: A critical need in disease prevention.

Gwendolyn Osborne1, Ruthann Rudel2, Megan Schwarzman3.   

Abstract

Although understanding the environmental factors that contribute to breast cancer could improve disease prevention, standard chemical testing protocols do not adequately evaluate chemicals' effects on breast development. Evidence suggests: (1) mammary gland (MG) development is a complex process that extends from gestation through fetal and neonatal growth, puberty, and pregnancy; (2) altered MG development can increase the risk of breast cancer and other adverse outcomes; and (3) chemical exposures during susceptible windows of development may alter the MG in ways that increase risk for later disease. Together, these highlight the need to better understand the complex relationship between exposure to endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) and the alterations in MG morphology and gene expression that ultimately increase disease risk. Changing guideline toxicity testing studies to incorporate perinatal exposures and MG whole mounts would generate critical knowledge about the effects of EDCs on the MG and could ultimately inform disease prevention.
Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Development; Endocrine disrupting compounds; Mammary gland; Toxicity testing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25091782     DOI: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2014.07.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Toxicol        ISSN: 0890-6238            Impact factor:   3.143


  16 in total

1.  Windows of sensitivity to toxic chemicals in the development of reproductive effects: an analysis of ATSDR's toxicological profile database.

Authors:  Melanie C Buser; Henry G Abadin; John L Irwin; Hana R Pohl
Journal:  Int J Environ Health Res       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Proceedings of the 2016 National Toxicology Program Satellite Symposium.

Authors:  Susan A Elmore; Vivian S Chen; Schantel Hayes-Bouknight; Jessica S Hoane; Kyathanahalli Janardhan; Linda H Kooistra; Thomas Nolte; Kathleen A Szabo; Gabrielle A Willson; Jeffrey C Wolf; David E Malarkey
Journal:  Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 1.902

Review 3.  State of the evidence 2017: an update on the connection between breast cancer and the environment.

Authors:  Janet M Gray; Sharima Rasanayagam; Connie Engel; Jeanne Rizzo
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 5.984

4.  Changes in mammary histology and transcriptome profiles by low-dose exposure to environmental phenols at critical windows of development.

Authors:  Kalpana Gopalakrishnan; Susan L Teitelbaum; Luca Lambertini; James Wetmur; Fabiana Manservisi; Laura Falcioni; Simona Panzacchi; Fiorella Belpoggi; Jia Chen
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2016-10-29       Impact factor: 6.498

5.  Psychosocial Stress Exposure Disrupts Mammary Gland Development.

Authors:  Marianna B Johnson; Joscelyn N Hoffmann; Hannah M You; Ricardo R Lastra; Sully Fernandez; Jordan W Strober; Ahmad B Allaw; Matthew J Brady; Suzanne D Conzen; Martha K McClintock
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2018-04-23       Impact factor: 2.673

6.  Associations of hair dye and relaxer use with breast tumor clinicopathologic features: Findings from the Women's circle of Health Study.

Authors:  Rohan Rao; Jasmine A McDonald; Emily S Barrett; Patricia Greenberg; Dede K Teteh; Susanne B Montgomery; Bo Qin; Yong Lin; Chi-Chen Hong; Christine B Ambrosone; Kitaw Demissie; Elisa V Bandera; Adana A M Llanos
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 6.498

Review 7.  Best practices to quantify the impact of reproductive toxicants on development, function, and diseases of the rodent mammary gland.

Authors:  Klara Matouskova; Gillian K Szabo; Jessica Daum; Suzanne E Fenton; Sofie Christiansen; Ana M Soto; Jennifer E Kay; Bethsaida Cardona; Laura N Vandenberg
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 3.421

8.  The mammary gland is a sensitive pubertal target in CD-1 and C57Bl/6 mice following perinatal perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) exposure.

Authors:  Deirdre K Tucker; Madisa B Macon; Mark J Strynar; Sonia Dagnino; Erik Andersen; Suzanne E Fenton
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 3.143

9.  A Convenient Method for Evaluating Epithelial Cell Proliferation in the Whole Mammary Glands of Female Mice.

Authors:  Grace E Berryhill; Ingrid Brust-Mascher; Jill H Huynh; Thomas R Famula; Colin Reardon; Russell C Hovey
Journal:  Endocrinology       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 4.736

10.  Differences in the Rate of in Situ Mammary Gland Development and Other Developmental Endpoints in Three Strains of Female Rat Commonly Used in Mammary Carcinogenesis Studies: Implications for Timing of Carcinogen Exposure.

Authors:  Jason P Stanko; Grace E Kissling; Vesna A Chappell; Suzanne E Fenton
Journal:  Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2016-09-09       Impact factor: 1.902

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.