Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
10492323
Reference Type
Journal Article
Subtype
Review
Title
On the use and interpretation of areola/nipple retention as a biomarker for anti-androgenic effects in rat toxicity studies
Author(s)
Schwartz, CL; Christiansen, S; Hass, U; Ramhøj, L; Axelstad, M; Löbl, NM; Svingen, T
Year
2021
Is Peer Reviewed?
1
Journal
Frontiers in Toxicology
EISSN:
2673-3080
Publisher
Frontiers Media Sa
Location
LAUSANNE
Volume
3
Page Numbers
730752
Language
English
PMID
35295101
DOI
10.3389/ftox.2021.730752
Web of Science Id
WOS:001002749300001
Abstract
Areola/nipple retention (NR) is an established biomarker for an anti-androgenic mode of action in rat toxicity studies. It is a mandatory measurement under several OECD test guidelines and is typically assessed in combination with anogenital distance (AGD). Both NR and AGD are considered retrospective biomarkers of insufficient androgen signaling during the masculinization programming window in male fetuses. However, there are still aspects concerning NR as a biomarker for endocrine disruption that remains to be clarified. For instance, can NR be regarded a permanent adverse effect? Is it a redundant measurement if AGD is assessed in the same study? Is NR equally sensitive and specific to anti-androgenic chemical substances as a shortening of male AGD? In this review we discuss these and other aspects concerning the use of NR as a biomarker in toxicity studies. We have collected available literature from rat toxicity studies that have reported on NR and synthesized the data in order to draw a clearer picture about the sensitivity and specificity of NR as an effect biomarker for an anti-androgenic mode of action, including comparisons to AGD measurements. We carefully conclude that NR and AGD in rats for the most part display similar sensitivity and specificity, but that there are clear exceptions which support the continued assessment of both endpoints in relevant reproductive toxicity studies. Available literature also support the view that NR in infant male rats signifies a high risk for permanent nipples in adulthood. Finally, the literature suggests that the mechanisms of action leading from a chemical stressor event to either NR or short AGD in male offspring are overlapping with respect to canonical androgen signaling, yet differ with respect to other mechanisms of action.
Keywords
risk assessment; endocrine disruption; nipple retention; rats; anogenital distance; anti-androgen
Series
FRONTIERS IN TOXICOLOGY
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity