Ten years of research on synergisms and antagonisms in chemical mixtures: A systematic review and quantitative reappraisal of mixture studies

荟萃分析 毒理 生态毒理学 生化工程 生物 医学 病理 工程类
作者
Olwenn Martin,Martin Scholze,Sibylle Ermler,Joanne McPhie,Stephanie K. Bopp,Aude Kienzler,Nikolaos Parissis,Andreas Kortenkamp
出处
期刊:Environment International [Elsevier BV]
卷期号:146: 106206-106206 被引量:219
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.envint.2020.106206
摘要

Several reviews of synergisms and antagonisms in chemical mixtures have concluded that synergisms are relatively rare. However, these reviews focused on mixtures composed of specific groups of chemicals, such as pesticides or metals and on toxicity endpoints mostly relevant to ecotoxicology. Doubts remain whether these findings can be generalised. A systematic review not restricted to specific chemical mixtures and including mammalian and human toxicity endpoints is missing.We conducted a systematic review and quantitative reappraisal of 10 years' of experimental mixture studies to investigate the frequency and reliability of evaluations of mixture effects as synergistic or antagonistic. Unlike previous reviews, we did not limit our efforts to certain groups of chemicals or specific toxicity outcomes and covered mixture studies relevant to ecotoxicology and human/mammalian toxicology published between 2007 and 2017.We undertook searches for peer-reviewed articles in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, GreenFile, ScienceDirect and Toxline and included studies of controlled exposures of environmental chemical pollutants, defined as unintentional exposures leading to unintended effects. Studies with viruses, prions or therapeutic agents were excluded, as were records with missing details on chemicals' identities, toxicities, doses, or concentrations.To examine the internal validity of studies we developed a risk-of-bias tool tailored to mixture toxicology. For a subset of 388 entries that claimed synergisms or antagonisms, we conducted a quantitative reappraisal of authors' evaluations by deriving ratios of predicted and observed effective mixture doses (concentrations).Our searches produced an inventory of 1220 mixture experiments which we subjected to subgroup analyses. Approximately two thirds of studies did not incorporate more than 2 components. Most experiments relied on low-cost assays with readily quantifiable endpoints. Important toxicity outcomes of relevance for human risk assessment (e.g. carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity) were rarely addressed. The proportion of studies that declared additivity, synergism or antagonisms was approximately equal (one quarter each); the remaining quarter arrived at different evaluations. About half of the 1220 entries were rated as "definitely" or "probably" low risk of bias. Strikingly, relatively few claims of synergistic or antagonistic effects stood up to scrutiny in terms of deviations from expected additivity that exceed the boundaries of acceptable between-study variability. In most cases, the observed mixture doses were not more than two-fold higher or lower than the predicted additive doses. Twenty percent of the entries (N = 78) reported synergisms in excess of that degree of deviation. Our efforts of pinpointing specific factors that predispose to synergistic interactions confirmed previous concerns about the synergistic potential of combinations of triazine, azole and pyrethroid pesticides at environmentally relevant doses. New evidence of synergisms with endocrine disrupting chemicals and metal compounds such as chromium (VI) and nickel in combination with cadmium has emerged.These specific cases of synergisms apart, our results confirm the utility of default application of the dose (concentration) addition concept for predictive assessments of simultaneous exposures to multiple chemicals. However, this strategy must be complemented by an awareness of the synergistic potential of specific classes of chemicals. Our conclusions only apply to the chemical space captured in published mixture studies which is biased towards relatively well-researched chemicals.The final protocol was published on the open-access repository Zenodo and attributed the following digital object identifier, doi: https://doi.org//10.5281/zenodo.1319759 (https://zenodo.org/record/1319759#.XXIzdy7dsqM).
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
科研小虫完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
nianxunxi完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
CipherSage应助一颗椰子糖耶采纳,获得10
3秒前
4秒前
慕青应助叶子采纳,获得10
5秒前
6秒前
无花果应助漂亮白枫采纳,获得10
8秒前
dormraider完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
9秒前
10秒前
12秒前
ppwl完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
13秒前
万能图书馆应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
星辰大海应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
Lucas应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
希望天下0贩的0应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
充电宝应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
所所应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
完美世界应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
SciGPT应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
酷波er应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
爱宝乐宝福宝应助bbh采纳,获得10
14秒前
16秒前
17秒前
好消息发布了新的文献求助20
18秒前
18秒前
一直向前发布了新的文献求助10
21秒前
如意的泥猴桃完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
土拨鼠完成签到 ,获得积分10
23秒前
24秒前
科目三应助林好事采纳,获得10
24秒前
叶子完成签到,获得积分10
24秒前
24秒前
Newt发布了新的文献求助10
25秒前
27秒前
李健应助青黛采纳,获得10
28秒前
小四发布了新的文献求助10
31秒前
Sky36001发布了新的文献求助20
32秒前
33秒前
高分求助中
A new approach to the extrapolation of accelerated life test data 1000
ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, 12th edition 500
‘Unruly’ Children: Historical Fieldnotes and Learning Morality in a Taiwan Village (New Departures in Anthropology) 400
Indomethacinのヒトにおける経皮吸収 400
Phylogenetic study of the order Polydesmida (Myriapoda: Diplopoda) 370
基于可调谐半导体激光吸收光谱技术泄漏气体检测系统的研究 350
Robot-supported joining of reinforcement textiles with one-sided sewing heads 320
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3989797
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3531914
关于积分的说明 11255516
捐赠科研通 3270597
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1805008
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 882181
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 809190