Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Environ Res. 2017 Feb;153:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.11.003. Epub 2016 Nov 19.

Urinary phthalate and phthalate alternative metabolites and isoprostane among couples undergoing fertility treatment.

Author information

1
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, 686 North Pleasant Street, Amherst, MA 01003, United States.
2
Department of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
3
Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Baystate Medical Center, 759 Chestnut Street, Springfield, MA 01199, United States.
4
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, 686 North Pleasant Street, Amherst, MA 01003, United States. Electronic address: rpilsner@umass.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Epidemiological data suggest associations between phthalate exposures to a variety of adverse reproductive outcomes including reduced sperm quality and reproductive success. While mechanisms of these associations are not fully elucidated, oxidative stress has been implicated as a potential mediator. We examined associations of urinary metabolites of phthalates and phthalate alternative plasticizers with oxidative stress among couples seeking fertility treatment.

METHODS:

Seventeen urinary plasticizer metabolites and 15-F2t isoprostane, a biomarker of oxidative stress, were quantified in spot samples from 50 couples seeking fertility treatment who enrolled in the Sperm Environmental Epigenetics and Development Study during 2014-2015.

RESULTS:

In multivariable analyses, percent change in isoprostane was positively associated with interquartile range increases for the oxidative metabolites of di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate, [mono-2-ethyl-5-hydroxyhexyl phthalate (MEHHP; 20.0%, p=0.02), mono-2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl phthalate (MEOHP; 24.1%, p=0.01), and mono-2-ethyl-5-carboxypentyl phthalate (MECPP; 24.1%, p=0.004)], mono-isobutyl phthalate (MiBP; 17.8%, p=0.02), mono-hydroxyisobutyl phthalate (MHiBP; 27.5%, p=0.003), and cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylic acid mono-hydroxy-isononyl ester (MHINCH; 32.3%, p=0.002). Stratification of participants by sex revealed that isoprostane was positively associated with MHiBP (41.4%, p=0.01) and monocarboxy-isononyl phthalate (MCNP; 26.0%, p=0.02) among females and MEOHP (35.8%, p=0.03), MiBP (29.2%, p=0.01), MHiBP (34.7%, p=0.007) and MHINCH (49.0%, p=0.002) among males.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our results suggest that exposure to phthalates and phthalate replacements are associated with higher levels of oxidative stress in a sex-specific manner. Additional studies are needed to replicate our findings and to examine the potential health implications of the use of phthalates and alternative phthalates in consumer end products.

KEYWORDS:

EDC; Endocrine disruptors; Isoprostane; Oxidative stress; Phthalates

PMID:
27875712
PMCID:
PMC5222784
DOI:
10.1016/j.envres.2016.11.003
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center