Assessment of endocrine disruptor impacts on lipid metabolism in a fatty acid-supplemented HepaRG human hepatic cell line

International audienceThe incidence of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is increasing worldwide. This disease encompasses several stages, from steatosis to steatohepatitis and, eventually, to fibrosis and cirrhosis. Exposure to environmental contaminants is one of the risk factors and an increasing amount of evidence points to a role for endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs). This study assesses the impact of selected EDCs on the formation of lipid droplets, the marker for steatosis in a hepatic model. The mechanisms underlying this effect are then explored. Ten compounds were selected according to their obesogenic properties: bisphenol A, F and S, butyl-paraben, cadmium chloride, p,p'-DDE, DBP, DEHP, PFOA and PFOS. Using a 2D or 3D model, HepaRG cells were exposed to the compounds with or without fatty acid supplementation. Then, the formation of lipid droplets was quantified by an automated fluorescence-based method. The expression of genes and proteins involved in lipid metabolism and the impact on cellular respiration was analyzed. The formation of lipid droplets, which is revealed or enhanced by oleic acid supplementation, was most effectively induced by p,p'-DDE and DEHP. Experiments employing either 2D or 3D culture conditions gave similar results. Both compounds induced the expression of PLIN2. p,p'-DDE also appears to act by decreasing in fatty acid oxidation. Some EDCs were able to induce the formation of lipid droplets, in HepaRG cells, an effect which was increased after supplementation of the cells with oleic acid. A full understanding of the mechanisms of these effects will require further investigation. The novel automated detection method described here may also be useful in the future as a regulatory test for EDC risk assessment

Obesity III: Obesogen assays: Limitations, strengths, and new directions

There is increasing evidence of a role for environmental contaminants in disrupting metabolic health in both humans and animals. Despite a growing need for well-understood models for evaluating adipogenic and potential obesogenic contaminants, there has been a reliance on decades-old in vitro models that have not been appropriately managed by cell line providers. There has been a quick rise in available in vitro models in the last ten years, including commercial availability of human mesenchymal stem cell and preadipocyte models; these models require more comprehensive validation but demonstrate real promise in improved translation to human metabolic health. There is also progress in developing three-dimensional and co-culture techniques that allow for the interrogation of a more physiologically relevant state. While diverse rodent models exist for evaluating putative obesogenic and/or adipogenic chemicals in a physiologically relevant context, increasing capabilities have been identified for alternative model organisms such as Drosophila, C. elegans, zebrafish, and medaka in metabolic health testing. These models have several appreciable advantages, including most notably their size, rapid development, large brood sizes, and ease of high-resolution lipid accumulation imaging throughout the organisms. They are anticipated to expand the capabilities of metabolic health research, particularly when coupled with emerging obesogen evaluation techniques as described herein

Obesity III: Obesogen assays: Limitations, strengths, and new directions

International audienceThere is increasing evidence of a role for environmental contaminants in disrupting metabolic health in both humans and animals. Despite a growing need for well-understood models for evaluating adipogenic and potential obesogenic contaminants, there has been a reliance on decades-old in vitro models that have not been appropriately managed by cell line providers. There has been a quick rise in available in vitro models in the last ten years, including commercial availability of human mesenchymal stem cell and preadipocyte models; these models require more comprehensive validation but demonstrate real promise in improved translation to human metabolic health. There is also progress in developing three-dimensional and co-culture techniques that allow for the interrogation of a more physiologically relevant state. While diverse rodent models exist for evaluating putative obesogenic and/or adipogenic chemicals in a physiologically relevant context, increasing capabilities have been identified for alternative model organisms such as Drosophila, C. elegans, zebrafish, and medaka in metabolic health testing. These models have several appreciable advantages, including most notably their size, rapid development, large brood sizes, and ease of high-resolution lipid accumulation imaging throughout the organisms. They are anticipated to expand the capabilities of metabolic health research, particularly when coupled with emerging obesogen evaluation techniques as described herein

Combinatorial pathway disruption is a powerful approach to delineate metabolic impacts of endocrine disruptors

International audienceThe prevalence of metabolic diseases, such as obesity, diabetes, metabolic syndrome and chronic liver diseases among others, has been rising for several years. Epidemiology and mechanistic (in vivo, in vitro and in silico) toxicology have recently provided compelling evidence implicating the chemical environment in the pathogenesis of these diseases. In this review, we will describe the biological processes that contribute to the development of metabolic diseases targeted by metabolic disruptors, and will propose an integrated pathophysiological vision of their effects on several organs. With regard to these pathomechanisms, we will discuss the needs, and the stakes of evolving the testing and assessment of endocrine disruptors to improve the prevention and management of metabolic diseases that have become a global epidemic since the end of last century

Feasibility of prospectively comparing opioid analgesia with opioid-free analgesia after outpatient general surgery: a pilot randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: The overprescription of opioids to surgical patients is recognized as an important factor contributing to the opioid crisis. However, the value of prescribing opioid analgesia (OA) vs opioid-free analgesia (OFA) after postoperative discharge remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) to assess the comparative effectiveness of OA vs OFA after outpatient general surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This parallel, 2-group, assessor-blind, pragmatic pilot RCT was conducted from January 29 to September 3, 2020 (last follow-up on October 2, 2020). at 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing outpatient abdominal (ie, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or hernia repair) or breast (ie, partial or total mastectomy) general surgical procedures. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to drugs used in the trial, preoperative opioid use, conditions that could affect assessment of outcomes, and intraoperative or early complications requiring hospitalization. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive OA (around-the-clock nonopioids and opioids for breakthrough pain) or OFA (around-the-clock nonopioids with increasing doses and/or addition of nonopioid medications for breakthrough pain) after postoperative discharge. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Main outcomes were a priori RCT feasibility criteria (ie, rates of surgeon agreement, patient eligibility, patient consent, treatment adherence, loss to follow-up, and missing follow-up data). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and interference, analgesic intake, 30-day unplanned health care use, and adverse events. Between-group comparison of outcomes followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: A total of 15 surgeons were approached; all (100%; 95% CI, 78%-100%) agreed to have patients recruited and adhered to the study procedures. Rates of patient eligibility and consent were 73% (95% CI, 66%-78%) and 57% (95% CI, 49%-65%), respectively. Seventy-six patients were randomized (39 [51%] to OA and 37 [49%] to OFA) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 55.5 [14.5] years; 50 [66%] female); 40 (53%) underwent abdominal surgery, and 36 (47%) underwent breast surgery. Seventy-five patients (99%; 95% CI, 93%-100%) adhered to the allocated treatment; 1 patient randomly assigned to OFA received an opioid prescription. Seventeen patients (44%) randomly assigned to OA consumed opioids after discharge. Seventy-three patients (96%; 95% CI, 89%-99%) completed the 30-day follow-up. The rate of missing questionnaires was 37 of 3724 (1%; 95% CI, 0.7%-1.4%). All the a priori RCT feasibility criteria were fulfilled. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this pilot RCT support the feasibility of conducting a robust, full-scale RCT to inform evidence-based prescribing of analgesia after outpatient general surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0425467

Obesity II: Establishing causal links between chemical exposures and obesity

Obesity is a multifactorial disease with both genetic and environmental components. The prevailing view is that obesity results from an imbalance between energy intake and expenditure caused by overeating and insufficient exercise. We describe another environmental element that can alter the balance between energy intake and energy expenditure: obesogens. Obesogens are a subset of environmental chemicals that act as endocrine disruptors affecting metabolic endpoints. The obesogen hypothesis posits that exposure to endocrine disruptors and other chemicals can alter the development and function of the adipose tissue, liver, pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, and brain, thus changing the set point for control of metabolism. Obesogens can determine how much food is needed to maintain homeostasis and thereby increase the susceptibility to obesity. The most sensitive time for obesogen action is in utero and early childhood, in part via epigenetic programming that can be transmitted to future generations. This review explores the evidence supporting the obesogen hypothesis and highlights knowledge gaps that have prevented widespread acceptance as a contributor to the obesity pandemic. Critically, the obesogen hypothesis changes the narrative from curing obesity to preventing obesity

Obesity II: Establishing causal links between chemical exposures and obesity

International audienceObesity is a multifactorial disease with both genetic and environmental components. The prevailing view is that obesity results from an imbalance between energy intake and expenditure caused by overeating and insufficient exercise. We describe another environmental element that can alter the balance between energy intake and energy expenditure: obesogens. Obesogens are a subset of environmental chemicals that act as endocrine disruptors affecting metabolic endpoints. The obesogen hypothesis posits that exposure to endocrine disruptors and other chemicals can alter the development and function of the adipose tissue, liver, pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, and brain, thus changing the set point for control of metabolism. Obesogens can determine how much food is needed to maintain homeostasis and thereby increase the susceptibility to obesity. The most sensitive time for obesogen action is in utero and early childhood, in part via epigenetic programming that can be transmitted to future generations. This review explores the evidence supporting the obesogen hypothesis and highlights knowledge gaps that have prevented widespread acceptance as a contributor to the obesity pandemic. Critically, the obesogen hypothesis changes the narrative from curing obesity to preventing obesity