Search

Population studies show worrisome trends towards earlier breast development, difficulty in breastfeeding, and increasing rates of breast cancer in young women. Multiple epidemiological studies have linked these outcomes with chemical exposures, and experimental studies have shown that many of these chemicals generate similar effects in rodents, often by disrupting hormonal regulation. These endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) can alter the progression of mammary gland (MG) development, impair the ability to nourish offspring via lactation, increase mammary tissue density, and increase the propensity to develop cancer. However, current toxicological approaches to measuring the effects of chemical exposures on the MG are often inadequate to detect these effects, impairing our ability to identify exposures harmful to the breast and limiting opportunities for prevention. This paper describes key adverse outcomes for the MG, including impaired lactation, altered pubertal development, altered morphology (such as increased mammographic density), and cancer. It also summarizes evidence from humans and rodent models for exposures associated with these effects. We also review current toxicological practices for evaluating MG effects, highlight limitations of current methods, summarize debates related to how effects are interpreted in risk assessment, and make recommendations to strengthen assessment approaches. Increasing the rigor of MG assessment would improve our ability to identify chemicals of concern, regulate those chemicals based on their effects, and prevent exposures and associated adverse health effects.

BackgroundPersonal care product use may contribute to elevated body burdens of consumer product chemicals among women of color; however, racial/ethnic differences in product use has been understudied. Community-engaged research can support the recruitment of diverse participants.ObjectiveTo document personal care product use among a diverse group of women (aged 18-34 years) living in California.MethodsThrough a community-academic partnership, we surveyed 357 women in California about product use information for 54 cosmetic, hair, menstrual/intimate care, and leave-on and rinse-off personal care products. We compared type and frequency of product use among Black, Hispanic/Latinx, Asian, and White women. We also summarized use of scented products and reasons women select products.ResultsWomen reported using a median of 8 products daily, with some women reporting up to 30 products daily. Hispanic/Latinx and Asian women used more cosmetics, and Black women used more hair and menstrual/intimate products than other women. Of the 54 products compared, there were significant differences in use by race/ethnicity for 28 products, with the largest number of significant differences between Black and White women.SignificanceThere is growing information on chemical exposures from personal care products and consequent adverse health effects, with implications for health disparities. Yet, there remains limited information on the range and types of products used by diverse racial/ethnic communities. This study helps close an important gap on product use inventories that can enable more informed public health interventions to limit exposures from personal care products.

Work from numerous fields of study suggests that exposures to hormonally active chemicals during sensitive windows of development can alter mammary gland development, function, and disease risk. Stronger links between many environmental pollutants and disruptions to breast health continue to be documented in human populations, and there remain concerns that the methods utilized to identify, characterize, and prioritize these chemicals for risk assessment and risk management purposes are insufficient. There are also concerns that effects on the mammary gland have been largely ignored by regulatory agencies. Here, we provide technical guidance that is intended to enhance collection and evaluation of the mammary gland in mice and rats. We review several features of studies that should be controlled to properly evaluate the mammary gland, and then describe methods to appropriately collect the mammary gland from rodents. Furthermore, we discuss methods for preparing whole mounted mammary glands and numerous approaches that are available for the analysis of these samples. Finally, we conclude with several examples where analysis of the mammary gland revealed effects of environmental toxicants at low doses. Our work argues that the rodent mammary gland should be considered in chemical safety, hazard and risk assessments. It also suggests that improved measures of mammary gland outcomes, such as those we present in this review, should be included in the standardized methods evaluated by regulatory agencies such as the test guidelines used for identifying reproductive and developmental toxicants.

Background: Established breast cancer risk factors, such as hormone replacement therapy and reproductive history, are thought to act by increasing estrogen and progesterone (P4) activity. Objective: We aimed to use in vitro screening data to identify chemicals that increase the synthesis of estradiol (E2) or P4 and evaluate potential risks. Method: Using data from a high-throughput (HT) in vitro steroidogenesis assay developed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ToxCast program, we identified chemicals that increased estradiol (E2-up) or progesterone (P4-up) in human H295R adrenocortical carcinoma cells. We prioritized chemicals by their activity. We compiled in vivo studies and assessments about carcinogenicity and reproductive/developmental (repro/dev) toxicity. We identified exposure sources and predicted intakes from the U.S. EPA’s ExpoCast. Results: We found 296 chemicals increased E2 (182) or P4 (185), with 71 chemicals increasing both. In vivo data often showed effects consistent with this mechanism. Of the E2- and P4-up chemicals, about 30% were likely repro/dev toxicants or carcinogens, whereas only 5–13% were classified as unlikely. However, most of the chemicals had insufficient in vivo data to evaluate their effects. Of 45 chemicals associated with mammary gland effects, and also tested in the H294R assay, 29 increased E2 or P4, including the well-known mammary carcinogen 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene. E2- and P4-up chemicals include pesticides, consumer product ingredients, food additives, and drinking water contaminants. Discussion: The U.S. EPA’s in vitro screening data identified several hundred chemicals that should be considered as potential risk factors for breast cancer because they increased E2 or P4 synthesis. In vitro data is a helpful addition to current toxicity assessments, which are not sensitive to mammary gland effects. Relevant effects on the mammary gland are often not noticed or are dismissed, including for 2,4-dichlorophenol and cyfluthrin. Fifty-three active E2-up and 59 active P4-up chemicals that are in consumer products, food, pesticides, or drugs have not been evaluated for carcinogenic potential and are priorities for study and exposure reduction. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8608

Breast cancer risk from pesticides may be missed if effects on mammary gland are not assessed in toxicology studies required for registration. Using US EPA's registration documents, we identified pesticides that cause mammary tumors or alter development, and evaluated how those findings were considered in risk assessment. Of 28 pesticides that produced mammary tumors, EPA's risk assessment acknowledges those tumors for nine and dismisses the remaining cases. For five pesticides that alter mammary gland development, the implications for lactation and cancer risk are not assessed. Many of the mammary-active pesticides activate pathways related to endocrine disruption: altering steroid synthesis in H295R cells, activating nuclear receptors, or affecting xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes. Clearer guidelines based on breast cancer biology would strengthen assessment of mammary gland effects, including sensitive histology and hormone measures. Potential cancer risks from several common pesticides should be re-evaluated, including: malathion, triclopyr, atrazine, propylene oxide, and 3-iodo-2-propynyl butylcarbamate (IPBC).