Evaluation of new alternative methods for the identification of estrogenic, androgenic and steroidogenic effects: a comparative in vitro/in silico study

Abstract

AbstractA suite of in vitro assays and in silico models were evaluated to identify which best detected the endocrine-disrupting (ED) potential of 10 test chemicals according to their estrogenic, androgenic and steroidogenic (EAS) potential compared to the outcomes from ToxCast. In vitro methods included receptor-binding, CALUX transactivation, H295R steroidogenesis, aromatase activity inhibition and the Yeast oestrogen (YES) and Yeast androgen screen (YAS) assays. The impact of metabolism was also evaluated. The YES/YAS assays exhibited a high sensitivity for ER effects and, despite some challenges in predicting AR effects, is a good initial screening assay. Results from receptor-binding and CALUX assays generally correlated and were in accordance with classifications based on ToxCast assays. ER agonism and AR antagonism of benzyl butyl phthalate were abolished when CALUX assays included liver S9. In silico final calls were mostly in agreement with the in vitro assays, and predicted ER and AR effects well. The efficiency of the in silico models (reflecting applicability domains or inconclusive results) was 43–100%. The percentage of correct calls for ER (50–100%), AR (57–100%) and aromatase (33–100%) effects when compared to the final ToxCast call covered a wide range from highly reliable to less reliable models. In conclusion, Danish (Q)SAR, Opera, ADMET Lab LBD and ProToxII models demonstrated the best overall performance for ER and AR effects. These can be combined with the YES/YAS assays in an initial screen of chemicals in the early tiers of an NGRA to inform on the MoA and the design of mechanistic in vitro assays used later in the assessment. Inhibition of aromatase was best predicted by the Vega, AdmetLab and ProToxII models. Other mechanisms and exposure should be considered when making a conclusion with respect to ED effects.