Comparative Temporal Toxicogenomic Analysis of TCDD- and TCDF-Mediated Hepatic Effects in Immature Female C57BL/6 Mice

Le résumé fourni par la source

Temporal analyses were performed on hepatic tissue from immature female C57BL/6 mice in order to compare the gene expression profiles for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibzofuran (TCDF). Time course studies conducted with a single oral dose of 300 microg/kg TCDF or 30 microg/kg TCDD were used to compare differential gene expression on complementary DNA microarrays containing 13,361 features, representing 8194 genes at 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 72, 120, and 168 h. One hundred and ninety-five genes were identified as differentially regulated by TCDF, of which 116 genes were in common with TCDD, with 109 exhibiting comparable expression profiles (correlation coefficients > 0.3). In general, TCDF was less effective in eliciting hepatic vacuolization, and differential gene expression compared with TCDD when given at an equipotent dose based on a toxic equivalence factor (TEF) of 0.1 for TCDF, especially 72-h postadministration. For example, the induction of Cyp1a1 messenger RNA by TCDF was less when compared TCDD. Moreover, TCDF induced less severe hepatocyte cytoplasmic vacuolization consistent with lower lipid accumulations which significantly subsided by 120 and 168 h when compared with TCDD. TCDF-elicited responses correlated with their hepatic tissue levels which gradually decreased between 18 and 168 h. Although both compounds elicited comparable gene expression profiles, especially at early time points, the TCDF responses were generally weaker. Collectively, these results suggest that the weaker TCDF responses could be attributed to differences in pharmacokinetics. However, more comprehensive dose-response studies are required at optimal times for each end point of interest in order to investigate the effect of pharmacokinetic differences on relative potencies that are important in establishing TEFs.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.