Advertisement

Archives of Toxicology

, Volume 92, Issue 12, pp 3613–3614 | Cite as

Highlight Report: humanized mice reveal interspecies differences in triclosan hepatotoxicity

  • Reham Hassan
  • Ahmed Ghallab
Editorial
  • 158 Downloads

Recently, Yangshun Tang and colleagues from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in Jefferson contributed an interesting article about the hepatotoxicity of triclosan (Tang et al. 2018). Triclosan is an antimicrobial compound used, e.g., in toothpaste, detergents, soap, and toys. It has been detected in human plasma at concentrations ranging between 0.035 and 1.2 µM (Allmyr et al. 2008; Hovander et al. 2002; Olaniyan et al. 2016) and is also found in breast milk and urine (Adolfsson-Erici et al. 2002; Dayan 2007; Olaniyan et al. 2016; Calafat et al. 2008). At doses of 100 mg/kg/day, triclosan causes hepatotoxicity in mice (Rodricks et al. 2010). It has also been shown that triclosan activates PPARα of mice and humans in vitro (Wu et al. 2014). However, it remained unclear whether activation of PPARα plays a similar role for induction of hepatotoxicity for mouse and human.

To answer this question, Tang and colleagues used PPARα-humanized mice and compared them to the corresponding wild-type animals (Tang et al. 2018). In both wild-type and PPARα-humanized mice, triclosan induced PPARα target genes, such as cytochrome P4504A and acyl-coenzyme A oxidase 1; similarly, elevated expression of peroxisomal genes was observed in mice of both genotypes (Tang et al. 2018). However, an increase in liver weight due to triclosan exposure was observed only in wild-type mice and not in PPARα-humanized mice. In addition, increased expression of proliferation associated genes was obtained only in wild type but not in humanized mice (Tang et al. 2018). This demonstrates that the activation of PPARα has different consequences in humans and in mice, which was also confirmed by analysis of BrdU incorporation.

A better understanding of the mechanisms of hepatotoxicity represents an important research focus in toxicology (Vartak et al. 2016; Weng et al. 2014; Bolt 2017; Ghallab et al. 2016; Hammad et al. 2014; Bystrom et al. 2017; Stöber 2016) and extrapolation of the results of mouse experiments to humans remains a challenge (Leist et al. 2017; Thiel et al. 2015; Jansen et al. 2017). One possibility is the use of primary hepatocyte cultures that allow the comparison of susceptibility of both cell types. However, this type of research is hampered by changes of hepatocyte physiology due to the isolation and cultivation process (Godoy et al. 2013, 2016; Grinberg et al. 2014).

Tang and colleagues are to be congratulated for their elegant approach to study interspecies differences. They give a clear explanation why mice show a hepatocyte proliferation response to triclosan exposure that is not seen in humans.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Adolfsson-Erici M, Pettersson M, Parkkonen J, Sturve J (2002) Triclosan, a commonly used bactericide found in human milk and in the aquatic environment in Sweden. Chemosphere 46(9–10):1485–1489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Allmyr M, Harden F, Toms L-ML et al (2008) The influence of age and gender on triclosan concentrations in Australian human blood serum. Sci Total Environ 393(1):162–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolt HM (2017) Highlight report: the pseudolobule in liver fibrosis. EXCLI J 16:1321–1322PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Bystrom P, Foley N, Toledo-Pereyra L, Quesnelle K (2017) Ischemic preconditioning modulates ROS to confer protection in liver ischemia and reperfusion. EXCLI J 16:483–496.  https://doi.org/10.17179/excli2017-166 (eCollection 2017. Review) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Calafat AM, Ye X, Wong L-Y, Reidy JA, Needham LL (2008) Urinary concentrations of triclosan in the U.S. population: 2003–2004. Environ Health Perspect 116(3):303–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dayan AD (2007) Risk assessment of triclosan [Irgasan®] in human breast milk. Food Chem Toxicol 45(1):125–129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ghallab A, Cellière G, Henkel SG, Drasdo D, Gebhardt R, Hengstler JG (2016) Model-guided identification of a therapeutic strategy to reduce hyperammonemia in liver diseases. J Hepatol 64(4):860–871.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2015.11.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Godoy P, Hewitt NJ, Albrecht U, Xu JJ, Yarborough KM, Hengstler JG (2013) Recent advances in 2D and 3D in vitro systems using primary hepatocytes, alternative hepatocyte sources and non-parenchymal liver cells and their use in investigating mechanisms of hepatotoxicity, cell signaling and ADME. Arch Toxicol 87(8):1315–1530CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Godoy P, Widera A, Schmidt-Heck W, Blüthgen N, Dooley S, Hengstler JG (2016) Gene network activity in cultivated primary hepatocytes is highly similar to diseased mammalian liver tissue. Arch Toxicol 90(10):2513–2529CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Grinberg M, Stöber RM, Edlund K, Leist M, Rahnenführer J, Hengstler JG (2014) Toxicogenomics directory of chemically exposed human hepatocytes. Arch Toxicol 88(12):2261–2287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hammad S, Hoehme S, Friebel A, Gebhardt R, Drasdo D, Hengstler JG (2014) Protocols for staining of bile canalicular and sinusoidal networks of human, mouse and pig livers, three-dimensional reconstruction and quantification of tissue microarchitecture by image processing and analysis. Arch Toxicol 88(5):1161–1183CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Hovander L, Malmberg T, Athanasiadou M et al (2002) Identification of hydroxylated PCB metabolites and other phenolic halogenated pollutants in human blood plasma. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 42(1):105–117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Jansen PL, Ghallab A, Vartak N, Reif R, Schaap FG, Hampe J, Hengstler JG (2017) The ascending pathophysiology of cholestatic liver disease. Hepatology 65(2):722–738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Leist M, Ghallab A, Graepel R, Kroese D, van de Water B, Hengstler JG (2017) Adverse outcome pathways: opportunities, limitations and open questions. Arch Toxicol 91(11):3477–3505.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-017-2045-3 (Review) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Olaniyan LWB, Mkwetshana N, Okoh AI (2016) Triclosan in water, implications for human and environmental health. SpringerPlus 5(1):1639CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Rodricks JV, Swenberg JA, Borzelleca JF, Maronpot RR, Shipp AM (2010) Triclosan: a critical review of the experimental data and development of margins of safety for consumer products. Crit Rev Toxicol 40(5):422–484CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Stöber R (2016) Pathophysiology of cholestatic liver disease and its relevance for in vitro tests of hepatotoxicity. EXCLI J 15:870–871.  https://doi.org/10.17179/excli2016-864 (eCollection 2016. No abstract available) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Tang Y, M Vanlandingham M, Wu Y, Beland FA, Olson GR, Fang JL (2018) Role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα) and PPARα-mediated species differences in triclosan-induced liver toxicity. Arch Toxicol 92(11):3391–3402.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-018-2308-7 (Epub 2018 Sep 20) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Thiel C, Schneckener S, Krauss M, Gebhardt R, Hengstler JG, Kuepfer L (2015) A systematic evaluation of the use of physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling for cross-species extrapolation. J Pharm Sci 104(1):191–206.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.24214 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Vartak N, Damle-Vartak A, Richter B, Dahmen U, Hammad S, Hengstler JG (2016) Cholestasis-induced adaptive remodeling of interlobular bile ducts. Hepatology 63(3):951–964CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Weng MK, Natarajan K, Scholz D, Hengstler JG, Waldmann T, Leist M (2014) Lineage-specific regulation of epigenetic modifier genes in human liver and brain. PLoS One 9(7):e102035.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102035 (eCollection 2014) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Wu Y, Wu Q, Beland FA, Ge P, Manjanatha MG, Fang J-L (2014) Differential effects of triclosan on the activation of mouse and human peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha. Toxicol Lett 231(1):17–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forensic Medicine and Toxicology Department, Faculty of Veterinary MedicineSouth Valley UniversityQenaEgypt

Personalised recommendations