State Key Laboratory of Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology, Research Center for Eco-environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; Institute for Translational Medicine, College of Medicine, Qingdao University, Deng Zhou Road 38, Qingdao 266021, China.
State Key Laboratory of Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology, Research Center for Eco-environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China.
Environ Pollut. 2018 Jun;237:1072-1079. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.027. Epub 2017 Nov 13.
The wide use of the alternatives to bisphenol A (BPA) has raised concerns about their potential toxicities. Considering the disrupting activity of BPA on thyroid hormone (TH) signaling, we investigated whether bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF), two leading alternatives, could interfere with TH signaling pathway using a series of assays in vitro and in vivo. In the fluorescence competitive binding assay, we found BPS and BPF, like BPA, bound to TH receptors (TRα and TRβ), with the binding potencies an order of magnitude lower than BPA (BPA > BPF > BPS). Molecular docking data also show their binding potencies to TRs. In the coactivator recruitment assay, BPS and BPF recruited coactivator to TRβ but not TRα, with weaker potencies than BPA. Correspondingly, agonistic actions of the three bisphenols in the absence or presence of T3 were observed in the TR-mediated reporter gene transcription assay. Also, all the three bisphenols induced TH-dependent GH3 cell proliferation, whereas BPA and BPF inhibited T3 induction in the presence of T3. As for in vivo assay, the three bisphenols like T3 induced TH-response gene transcription in Pelophylax nigromaculatus tadpoles, but in the presence of T3 altered T3-induced gene transcription in a biphasic concentration-response manner. These results for the first time demonstrate that BPS and BPF, like BPA, have potential to interfere with TH signaling pathway, i.e., they generally activate TH signaling in the absence of T3, but in the presence of TH, display agonistic or/and antagonistic actions under certain condition. Our study highlights the potential risks of BPS and BPF as BPA alternatives.
双酚 S(BPS)和双酚 F(BPF)作为双酚 A(BPA)的替代品被广泛应用,但其潜在毒性引发了人们的关注。考虑到 BPA 对甲状腺激素(TH)信号的干扰作用,我们通过一系列体外和体内实验,研究了这两种主要替代品是否会干扰 TH 信号通路。在荧光竞争结合实验中,我们发现 BPS 和 BPF 与 BPA 一样,与 TH 受体(TRα和 TRβ)结合,结合能力比 BPA 低一个数量级(BPA>BPF>BPS)。分子对接数据也显示了它们与 TRs 的结合能力。在共激活子募集实验中,BPS 和 BPF 募集共激活子到 TRβ,但不募集到 TRα,其作用强度比 BPA 弱。相应地,在没有或存在 T3 的情况下,这三种双酚类化合物在 TR 介导的报告基因转录实验中表现出激动作用。此外,所有三种双酚类化合物都能诱导 GH3 细胞增殖,而 BPA 和 BPF 在存在 T3 的情况下抑制 T3 诱导的增殖。至于体内实验,这三种双酚类化合物与 T3 一样,诱导黑斑蛙蝌蚪的 TH 反应基因转录,但在存在 T3 的情况下,以双相浓度反应方式改变 T3 诱导的基因转录。这些结果首次表明,BPS 和 BPF 与 BPA 一样,具有干扰 TH 信号通路的潜力,即在没有 T3 的情况下,它们通常会激活 TH 信号,但在存在 T3 的情况下,在某些条件下,它们会表现出激动或/和拮抗作用。我们的研究强调了 BPS 和 BPF 作为 BPA 替代品的潜在风险。