The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hepatocarcinogenic Potential of Di(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate in Rodents and its Implications on Human Risk
Abstract
The plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), to which humans are extensively exposed, was found to be hepatocarcinogenic in rats and mice. DEHP is potentially set free from objects made of synthetic materials (e.g., those used in medicine). Chronically, the greatest amounts are transferred to persons undergoing hemodialysis (up to 3.1 mg/kg b.w. per day) who would thus be considered the individuals most endangered by tumorigenesis. Although toxicokinetics seem to play a certain unclear role in the course of DEHP-related toxicity, toxicodynamic factors appear more decisive. DEHP is a representative of "peroxisome proliferators" (PP), a distinct group of substances that, in rodents, do not only induce peroxisomes but also specific enzymes in other organelles, organ growth, and DNA synthesis. The cluster of the characteristic effects of PP is generally, although perhaps not quite appropriately summarized as "peroxisome proliferation," and is strongest in the liver. The lowest observed effect level (LOEL) and the no observed effect level (NOEL) of peroxisome proliferation in the rat, as determined by the induction of specific enzymes (peroxisomal beta-oxidation, carnitine-acetyl-transferase, cytochrome P-452), DNA synthesis, and hepatomegaly, may be assumed as 50 and 25 mg/kg b.w. per day, respectively. DEHP and other carcinogenic PP are neither genotoxic nor tumor initiators, but they appear to be tumor promoters, also implicating a threshold level for the carcinogenic effect. Although a causal relationship between a particular effect of peroxisome proliferation and hepatocarcinogenesis is as yet unknown, peroxisome proliferation as a whole phenomenon appears to be associated with the potential of tumor induction, as shown by comparison of the relative strength of individual PP and by comparison of species and organ specificities. Likewise, LOEL and NOEL of rodent carcinogenesis, that is, 300 and 50 to 100 mg/kg b.w. per day, respectively, are above but not too far from the corresponding values for the investigated parameters of peroxisome proliferation. Thus, with respect to dose alone, worst-case exposure in hemodialysis patients is at least 16-fold below the LOEL of any characterized PP-specific effect of DEHP and approximately 100-fold below that of DEHP-related tumorigenesis. Also, primates are less responsive to PP than rats with respect to the investigated biochemical and morphological parameters. If this lower primate responsiveness is extrapolated to estimate carcinogenicity in humans, we might thus arrive at an even larger safety margin than when based on exposure alone. Doses of PP hypolipidemics that had clearly induced several indicators of peroxisome proliferation in rats did not cause any clear-cut enhancements in the peroxisomes of patients, even though most of these hypolipidemics were considerably stronger PP than DEHP. Thus, an actual threat to humans by DEHP seems rather unlikely. Accordingly, hepatocarcinogenesis was neither enhanced in workers exposed to DEHP nor in patients treated with hypolipidemics.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Helsinki Heart Study: Primary-Prevention Trial with Gemfibrozil in Middle-Aged Men with Dyslipidemia
Frick, M. H., Elo, O., Haapa, K., Heinonen, O. P., Heinsalmi, P., Helo, P., Huttunen, J. K., Kaitaniemi, P., Koskinen, P., Manninen, V., et al. (1987) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198711123172001 · Cited by 3,881
Activation of a member of the steroid hormone receptor superfamily by peroxisome proliferators
Issemann, I., & Green, S. (1990) · Nature · doi:10.1038/347645a0 · Cited by 3,519
BARBER, E. (1992) · Fundamental and Applied Toxicology · doi:10.1016/0272-0590(92)90086-w · Cited by 119
Liss, G. M., Albro, P. W., Hartle, R. W., & Stringer, W. T. (1985) · Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health · doi:10.5271/sjweh.2209 · Cited by 47
Cited by
Monitoring phthalate exposure in humans
Latini, G. (2005) · Clinica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.cccn.2005.05.003 · Cited by 454
Quantification of 22 phthalate metabolites in human urine☆
SILVA, M., SAMANDAR, E., PREAUJR, J., REIDY, J., NEEDHAM, L., & CALAFAT, A. (2007) · Journal of Chromatography B · doi:10.1016/j.jchromb.2007.10.023 · Cited by 445
Phthalate-induced Leydig cell hyperplasia is associated with multiple endocrine disturbances
Akingbemi, B. T., Ge, R., Klinefelter, G. R., Zirkin, B. R., & Hardy, M. P. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0305977101 · Cited by 355
The internal exposure of Taiwanese to phthalate—An evidence of intensive use of plastic materials
Chen, M.-L., Chen, J.-S., Tang, C.-L., & Mao, I.-F. (2008) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2007.07.004 · Cited by 137
Plasma Phthalate Levels in Pubertal Gynecomastia
Durmaz, E., Özmert, E. N., Erkekoğlu, P., Giray, B., Derman, O., Hıncal, F., & Yurdakök, K. (2010) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2009-0724 · Cited by 126
Metadata
- Authors
- Huber, W. W., Grasl-kraupp, B., & Schulte-hermann, R.
- Venue
- Critical Reviews in Toxicology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1996-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 365-481
- ISSN
- 0045-6446 (ISSN-L)
- 1040-8444
- 1547-6898
- OpenAlex
- W1982728225
- Cited by
- 302
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 6.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hepatocarcinogenic Potential of Di(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate in Rodents and its Implications on Human Risk. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/10408449609048302
- The paper
- Huber, W. W., Grasl-kraupp, B., & Schulte-hermann, R. (1996). Hepatocarcinogenic Potential of Di(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate in Rodents and its Implications on Human Risk. Critical Reviews in Toxicology. https://doi.org/10.3109/10408449609048302
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.