Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 15, pp 15265–15267 | Cite as

Erratum to: The OECD validation program of the H295R steroidogenesis assay: Phase 3. Final inter-laboratory validation study

  • Markus Hecker
  • Henner Hollert
  • Ralph Cooper
  • Anne-Marie Vinggaard
  • Yumi Akahori
  • Margaret Murphy
  • Christine Nellemann
  • Eric Higley
  • John Newsted
  • John Laskey
  • Angela Buckalew
  • Stefanie Grund
  • Sibylle Maletz
  • John Giesy
  • Gary Timm
Erratum

Erratum to: Environ Sci Pollut Res (2011) 18: 503

  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-010-0396-x

In the original article wrong unites were quoted in Table 3 (page 508) and Table 4 (page 510) as well as in the paragraph 3.2 Core chemical exposure experiments on page 509. Also in paragraph 2.3 Selection and testing of chemicals the link to the Supplemental Materials (ESM) was missing. The correct versions of the tables and the paragraph as well as the ESM link are provided below.

3.2 Core chemical exposure experiments

There were chemical-specific differences in the response of T production after exposure of H295R cells to the 12 core chemicals (Table 3). With a few exceptions, the observed chemical-specific responses of T production were comparable among laboratories and could be grouped into three different types of effects: inducers, inhibitors, and negative reference chemicals. Among the inducers, exposure to trilostane resulted in the greatest fold changes (>10-fold induction) in T concentration when compared to SCs. The least fold changes were observed for the atrazine exposures where induction of T production was less than 1.5-fold with the exception of Lab 2, at which maximum induction was 2.4-fold. No effect on T production was observed after exposure to atrazine at Lab 6. Exposure to prochloraz resulted in a greater than 15-fold reduction of T production at the greatest concentration tested (100 μM) at all laboratories with the exception of Lab 4 where an up to 4.5-fold reduction was observed. The greater LOEC reported for Lab 2 is likely a function of the relatively great variation among replicate experiments at 0.01 μM (CV=35%). It is unclear why T production by cells was more sensitive to the exposure with prochloraz at Labs 1 and 3. However, a concentration-dependent response was observed starting at 0.01 μM, which is similar to the response patterns at the other labs. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that the significant reduction at 0.0001 and 0.001 μM represents an artifact. Exposure to the other inhibitors resulted in less than 4-fold changes in T production. When chemicals exhibited a less than 1.5-fold change in T production, they were categorized as negatives. This threshold was defined based on the average variation observed across all laboratories among replicate experiments. Some of these negative chemicals could have been categorized as inhibitors in individual cases (molinate: Lab 4; benomyl: Lab 1). However, even in situations where inhibition was observed at an individual laboratory, changes were always less than 2-fold and typically were not concentration-dependent. For instance, exposure to nonoxynol-9 resulted in a decrease in T concentrations at non-cytotoxic concentrations at two of five laboratories for which data was available. Relative to the SCs, inhibition of T production at Lab 1 was 29% (1 μM), while at Lab 2, it was 47% (10 μM). However, it should be noted that, at Lab 2, exposure to 10 μM nonoxynol-9 resulted in an average increase in cell viability (138% viable cells relative to the SCs), and thus the observed reduction in T production may be an artifact due to the correction for cell viability, especially as no such increase was observed by any of the other groups. The greatest letrozole concentration resulted in a significant decrease in T at all laboratories.

Table 3

Lowest observed effect concentrations (LOECs; measured by Dunnett’s or Mann Whitney U test mu) and strength and direction of change (⇓= >0.5-fold; ⇓⇓ = 0.5- to >0.25-fold; ⇓⇓⇓ = 0.25- to >0.1-fold; ⇓⇓⇓⇓ = ≤0.1-fold; ⇑ = <2-fold; ⇑⇑ = 2- to <fold; ⇑⇑⇑ = 4- to <20-fold; ⇑⇑⇑⇑ = ≥20-fold) for testosterone (T) and estradiol (E2) after exposure to the twelve core chemicals. Ranges refer to maximum values measured in repeated experiments. nd – not detectable; --- chemical not analyzed. Gray shaded cells – uncertainty due to interference of the antibody based hormone detection system with the test chemical

aOnly one experiment was conducted or considered for data evaluation

bNot statistically significant; p = 0.051

cGreatest concentration cytotoxic

dEffects occurred at greatest non-cytotoxic concentration; no dose-response

eCytotoxicity observed at concentration at which effects occurred at other laboratories = 10

Table 4

Lowest observed effect concentrations (LOECs; measured by Dunnett’s test) and strength and direction of change (⇓ = >0.5-fold; ⇓⇓ = 0.5- to >0.25-fold; ⇓⇓⇓ = 0.25- to >0.1-fold; ⇓⇓⇓⇓ = ≤0.1-fold; ⇑ = <2-fold; ⇑⇑ = 2- to <fold; ⇑⇑⇑ = 4- to <20-fold; ⇑⇑⇑⇑ = ≥20-fold) observed for the 16 test chemicals. nd – not detectable. Chemicals tested at the second laboratories (2nd Lab) were as follows; Lab2: Piperonyl butoxide, ketoconazole, prometon, DEHP, flutamide and danazol; Lab3: Bisphenol A, fenarimol, genistein, finasteride and dinitrophenol; Lab4: Spironolactone, mifepristone, tricrecyl phosphate, dimethoate and glyphosate

 

Testosterone

LOEC [μM]

Max Change

1st Labb

2nd Labc

1st Lab

2nd Lab

Ketoconazole

1

1

⇓⇓⇓

⇓⇓⇓

Genistein

10

10

⇓⇓

⇓⇓⇓

Finasteride

10

100d

⇓⇓

⇓⇓

Bisphenol A

10

10

⇓⇓

Dinitrophenol

0.0001

100d

⇓⇓

Piperonyl butoxide

10

10

Spironolactone

1

1

⇓⇓⇓

⇓⇓

Fenarimol

nd

10

nd

⇓⇓

Danazol

nd

nd

nd

nd

DEHP

nd

nd

nd

nd

Dimethoate

nd

nd

nd

nd

Flutamide

nd

nd

nd

nd

Glyphosate

nd

nd

nd

nd

Prometon

nd

nd

nd

nd

Tricrecyl phosphate

10

nd

nd

Mifepristone

0.1

nd

nd

 

Estradiol

LOEC [μM]

Max Change

1st Lab

2nd Lab

1st Lab

2nd Lab

Danazol

1

10

⇓⇓⇓

⇓⇓

Ketoconazole

10

10

⇓⇓

⇓⇓

Fenarimol

nd

1

nd

⇓⇓

Finasteride

nd

100d

nd

Glyphosate

nd

nd

nd

nd

Dinitrophenol

nd

nd

nd

nd

Spironolactone

nd

nd

nd

nd

Piperonyl butoxide

nd

nd

nd

nd

Dimethoate

10

nd

⇑⇑

nd

Flutamide

10

nd

⇑⇑

nd

Tricrecyl phosphate

10

nd

⇑⇑⇑

nd

Bisphenol A

10

1

⇑⇑

⇑⇑

DEHP

1a

1

⇑⇑

⇑⇑

Mifepristone

0.1

1

⇑⇑

⇑⇑

Prometon

100d

100d

⇑⇑⇑⇑

⇑⇑

Genistein

10

10

⇑⇑⇑⇑

⇑⇑⇑⇑

aconsidered because there was a clear concentration-response at all but the greatest concentration

blead laboratory (Lab 1)

cparticipating laboratory (Labs 2,3 and 4)

dEffects occurred at greatest non-cytotoxic concentration; no dose-response

Supplementary material

11356_2017_321_MOESM1_ESM.docx (423 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 423 kb)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Markus Hecker
    • 1
    • 2
  • Henner Hollert
    • 3
  • Ralph Cooper
    • 4
  • Anne-Marie Vinggaard
    • 5
  • Yumi Akahori
    • 6
  • Margaret Murphy
    • 7
  • Christine Nellemann
    • 5
  • Eric Higley
    • 2
  • John Newsted
    • 8
  • John Laskey
    • 9
  • Angela Buckalew
    • 4
  • Stefanie Grund
    • 10
  • Sibylle Maletz
    • 3
  • John Giesy
    • 2
    • 7
  • Gary Timm
    • 11
  1. 1.ENTRIX, Inc.SasaktoonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Veterinary Biomedical Sciences and Toxicology CentreUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  3. 3.Department of Ecosystem Analysis, Institute for Environmental ResearchRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  4. 4.Endocrinology Branch, RTD, NHEERL, ORDUS Environmental Protection AgencyResearch Triangle ParkUSA
  5. 5.Department of Toxicology & Risk Assessment, National Food InstituteTechnical University of DenmarkSoborgDenmark
  6. 6.Chemicals Evaluation and Research InstituteChemicals Assessment CenterSaitamaJapan
  7. 7.Department of Biology & ChemistryCity University of Hong KongHong KongChina
  8. 8.ENTRIX, Inc.OkemosUSA
  9. 9.Senior Environmental Employment ProgramNational Caucus on Black AgedResearch Triangle ParkUSA
  10. 10.Department of ZoologyUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  11. 11.Office of Science Coordination & PolicyUS Environmental Protection AgencyWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations