NIH Public Access
Author Manuscript
Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Published in final edited form as:
Toxicol Lett. 2006 September 10; 165(3): 230–241. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2006.04.005.

Determination of in vitro relative potency (REP) values for monoortho polychlorinated biphenyls after purification with active
charcoal
A.K. Petersa,*, P.E. Leonardsb, B. Zhaoc, Å. Bergmand, M.S. Denisonc, and M. Van den
Bergaa Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80176, 3508 TD

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Utrecht, The Netherlands b Netherlands Institute for Fisheries Research (RIVO), PO Box 69, 1970
AB, Wageningen, The Netherlands c Department of Environmental Toxicology, Meyer Hall,
University of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA d Department ofEnvironmental Chemistry, Wallenberg Laboratory, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm,
SwedenAbstract

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The TEF system for dioxin-like compounds has included assignment of TEF values for monoortho polychlorinated biphenyls (MO-PCBs). Small traces of aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR)active impurities could result in artifactually higher relative potency (REP) values. MO-PCBs-105, -118, -156, and -167 were purified on an active charcoal column to remove AhR agoniststhat could be present as impurities. Activation or inhibition of AhR-dependent gene expression by
purified MO-PCBs was studied in stably transfected cell lines (H1G1.1c3 mouse, H4G1.1c2 rat
hepatoma), containing an AhR-responsive (AhR-EGFP) reporter gene. In addition, EROD activity
was used as marker for CYP1A1 activity in these cell lines. MO-PCBs -105, -118, -156 induced
AhR-EGFP expression in both rodent cell lines, with PCB-156 (10 μM) being most effectively;
inducing gene expression to ~27% of TCDD (mouse cells) and 62.5 ± 3.4% (rat cells) of TCDD.
This concurred with increased EROD activity in both cell lines to maxima of 20.5 ± 1.5% and 68± 3.2% of TCDD, respectively. No induction was observed for PCB-167. In the H1G1.1c3 mouse
cells, PCB-105, -118 and -156 (10 μM) significantly reduced TCDD-induced AhR-EGFP
expression to 50.9 ± 2.9%, 58.3 ± 2.2% and 70.8 ± 1.3% of TCDD. Reduced EROD activity was
also observed, of 39.3 ± 2.8%, 67 ± 5% and 48.3 ± 4% compared to TCDD. PCB-167 did not
result in significant reduction. In rat cells, only PCB-156 resulted in significant decrease in
TCDD-induced AhR-EGFP expression of 35%, suggesting species differences play a role. Our
results suggest that purification of MO-PCBs is an essential step in determining accurate REP
values, and could very likely lead to lower TEF values than those presently assigned by the WHO.

Keywords
MO-PCB; TEF; AhR; EROD; CYP1A1; AhR-EGFP*

Corresponding author at: Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Yalelaan 2, PO Box 80176, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Fax: +31 30 2535077. L.Peters@iras.uu.nl (A.K. Peters).

Peters et al.

Page 2

1. Introduction
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), dibenzofurans (PCDFs) and biphenyls (PCBs)
are important classes of persistent organic compounds found in the global environment andmany individual congeners are highly toxic (Safe, 1994). Because of their insulating andflame retardancy properties, PCBs were extensively used in industrial applications, and havebeen commercially produced since the 1920s. Releases of PCBs into the environment haveresulted in a widespread global distribution into all environmental and biological matrices(Hong et al., 1998). These compounds are lipophilic and accumulate in lipid rich bodytissues and fluids from man and wildlife species and can biomagnify up the food chain.
PCBs were banned for open applications in many countries in the Western world since thelate 1970s due to their persistent nature and toxic effects (Ballschmiter and Zell, 1980). PCB
exposure, especially in occupational settings and wildlife, has been associated with e.g.
chloracne, carcinogenesis, teratogenesis, impaired immune responses, endocrine disruption,
as well as the induction of gene expression (Ahlborg et al., 1994; Safe, 1994).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Environmental contamination by PCDDs and PCDFs has occurred trough emission fromwaste incinerators and general combustion reactions, their presence as impurities inindustrial products such as herbicides and generation during the bleaching of wood pulp for
paper production (Ahlborg et al., 1994; Safe, 1994; Van den Berg et al., 1998). Human
exposure to PCBs and dioxin-like compounds occurs primarily through occupational anddietary exposure, although concentrations of PCBs and dioxins have declined over the last
decades due to the decreased use of the compounds (Ahlborg et al., 1992; Baars et al., 2004;
Shadel et al., 2001).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

There are 209 possible PCBs congeners and their dioxin-like biological and toxic effects andrelative potency depend on their chlorination pattern which dictates their ability to bind toand activate the aryl hydrocarbon (Ah) receptor and AhR-dependent toxicity (Ahlborg et al.,
1992; Andersson et al., 1999; Giesy and Kannan, 1998; Safe, 1990, 1994). In this regard,
PCBs have been structurally divided into three groups; the non-ortho PCBs with a planar
conformation, ability to activate the AhR and produce dioxin-like effects; the mono-ortho(MO-) substituted PCBs (e.g. PCB-105, -118, -123, -156, -157, -167, and -189) with someplanar conformation, weak ability to activate the AhR and produce some dioxin-like effects;
multiple-ortho substituted PCBs with a non-planar configuration, no or very low affinity for
the AhR and inability to produce dioxin-like effects. The biological and toxic effects of
PCBs have been studied extensively. Research has primarily focused on the non-ortho
substituted congeners, i.e. PCBs -77, -126 and -169 as these are potent agonists for the AhR
that produce dioxin-like toxic effects. As a consequence, these congeners have been
assigned toxic equivalency factors (TEF) values by the World Health Organization (WHO)(Ahlborg et al., 1992; Giesy and Kannan, 1998; Van den Berg et al., 1998). While the MOPCBs have always been thought to have low affinity for the AhR, with TEF values varying
from 1 × 10−5 to 1 × 10−4 (Ahlborg et al., 1992; Safe, 1990, 1994; Van den Berg et al.,1998), due to their relatively high concentrations in food and human milk these PCBs
contribute significantly to the overall total toxic equivalency (TEQs) of a sample (Ahlborg etal., 1992, 1994). The MO-PCBs, together with the non-ortho substituted dioxin-like PCBs
typically represent a higher percentage of the total TEQs of a sample, than that from the
PCDDs and PCDFs (Ahlborg et al., 1992).
The toxic and biological effects of PCDDs, PCDFs and those PCBs with dioxin-like activity
are mediated by the AhR, a ligand-dependent transcription factor. While the AhR can befound in the cytoplasm of almost all vertebrate cells, significant species and tissue
differences exist in its concentration and distribution (Denison et al., 2002; Denison and
Heath-Pagliuso, 1998; Guengerich, 1993). In addition to the planar halogenatedToxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 3

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

polyaromatic compounds, recent studies have revealed the ability of very structurally very
diverse chemicals to bind and/or activate the AhR and AhR-dependent gene expressions(Denison et al., 2002; Denison and Heath-Pagliuso, 1998; Hahn, 2002). Upon ligand
binding, the ligand:AhR complex translocates into the nucleus, wherein it binds to the AhR
nuclear translocator protein (ARNT) (Whitlock et al., 1996). Binding of the resulting
ligand:AhR:ARNT complex to its specific DNA recognition site, the dioxin response
element (DRE), stimulates transcription of a variety of genes, including that of Cytochrome
P450 1A1 (CYP1A1) (Hankinson, 2005; Kuramoto et al., 2002; Lees and Whitelaw, 1999;
Mimura et al., 1999; Nebert and Gonzalez, 1987).
The induction of CYP1A1 has been used both as a model system to study the molecularmechanism of AhR activation and as a bioanalytical method to determine the relative
potency of AhR agonists (Denison et al., 2004). Given the role of the AhR in both geneinduction and toxicity of these chemicals, it is not surprising that there is a high degree ofcorrelation between the relative potency (REP) of PCDDs, PCDFs and PCBs to induce
AhR-dependent gene expression (e.g., CYP1A1) and their relative toxic potency (i.e., their
TEF value).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The ability of MO-PCBs to induce CYP1A1 has been previously examined in various
human cell lines. While MO-PCBs failed to induce EROD activity in the human hepatoma(HepG2) cell line, or in a human prostate carcinoma (LNCaP) cell line, they were weak
inducers of CYP1A1 in the rat hepatoma (H4IIE) cell line (Endo et al., 2003; Zeiger et al.,2001). In addition, although PCB-156 could induce CYP1A1 in fish (PLHC-1) hepatoma
cells, two other MO-PCBs, -105 and -118, induced little or no CYP1A1 activity(Hestermann et al., 2000). In primary cultures of rat and cynomolgus monkey hepatocytes,
MO-PCBs were found to induce CYP1A1-dependent EROD activity (Chen and Bunce,
2004; Van der Burght et al., 1998, 1999; Zeiger et al., 2001).
In contrast, no CYP1A1 induction was observed with individual MO-PCBs (except
PCB-156) in in vivo experiments with rats and mice (DeVito et al., 1993; Kuriyama et al.,2003). Thus, when reviewing the relative potencies of MO-PCBs in various in vitro and invivo systems there are significant, yet unexplained differences, which are in strong contrast
with consistent induction results obtained with PCB-126 (Haws et al., 2004, 2006).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

While species, tissue and cell-type differences could contribute to the variability in the
results of the above studies, recent questions regarding the presence of impurities in MOPCB preparations that have relatively potent dioxin-like activities have complicated clear
interpretation of prior studies (DeVito et al., 2003; Van den Berg et al., 1998). The presenceof low levels of potent AhR-active compounds (such as PCDFs or coplanar PCBs) as
impurities in a test compound that is presumed to be pure, could actually be responsible forsome or all of the AhR-mediated responses that would otherwise be contributed to the test
compound (Brown et al., 2003; Koistinen et al., 1996).
Here we have used several MO-PCBs (PCB-105, -118, -156, and -167; Fig. 1) that havebeen extensively purified to eliminate the presence of dioxin-like PCDDs, PCDFs and PCB
contaminants This was done in order to clearly determine whether these MO-PCBs can bindto and activate AhR-dependent gene expression and/or whether their previously documented
ability to activate the AhR was due to the presence of other AhR-active agonist
contaminants present in the MO-PCB preparations.

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 4

2. Materials and methods
2.1. Chemicals

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The mono-ortho-PCBs -105, -118, -156, and -167 were purchased from Cambridge Isotope
Laboratories (Woburn, MA, USA); each congener was subjected to purification on activatedcharcoal and Celite to remove possible contamination with undesired dioxin-like
contaminants (Marsh et al., 1999). The compounds were subsequently analyzed by HRGCMS to determine whether the contaminants were still present in the mixture.
2,3,7,8-TCDD (>99% pure) was purchased from Cambridge Isotope Laboratories (Woburn,MA, USA); cell culture media Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM), phosphatebuffered saline (PBS), and fetal calf serum (FCS) were obtained from Gibco BRL (Breda,
The Netherlands). All other chemicals were obtained from Sigma Chemical Company (St.
Louis, MO, USA).
2.2. Cell culture

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The mouse and rat hepatoma cell lines (H1G1.1c3 and H4G1.1c2) were created by stabletransfection of mouse hepatoma (Hepa1c1c7) and rat hepatoma (H4IIE) cells with the AhRresponsive enhanced green fluorescent protein (AhR-EGFP) reporter plasmid pGreen1 asreported earlier (Nagy et al., 2002). Both cell lines were cultured in DMEM supplemented
with 10% heat inactivated FCS, 100 U/ml penicillin, and 100 μg/ml streptomycin in an
incubator (5% CO2, 37 °C).
2.3. Enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) assay
The H1G1.1c3 and H4G1.1c2 cell lines were stably transfected with an enhanced green
fluorescent protein (EGFP) reporter containing approximately 500 bp of the CYP1A1
promoter including 4 XRE sequences (Nagy et al., 2002). Both cell lines were seeded innormal culture medium in 96 well plates (1 × 104 cells/well) and exposed after 24 h to thesolvent control DMSO (0.1%), positive controls TCDD (0.001–1 nM) and PCB-126 (0.01–
10 nM), the indicated MO-PCBs (0.01–10 μM), or co-exposed to various concentrations ofboth TCDD and MO-PCBs. After 72 h the cells were washed twice with phosphate bufferedsaline (PBS, 37 °C), PBS was added to each well and fluorescence of the intact cells wasmeasured using an excitation wavelength of 485 nm and emission wavelength of 510 nm ina Fluostar fluorescence plate reader (BMG). Induced AhR-EGFP activity was determined bysubtracting the background fluorescence in the DMSO sample from the fluorescence treatedsamples (Galietta et al., 2001).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

2.4. 7-Ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) assay
Ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylation (EROD) activity was used as a marker for CYP1A1
catalytic activity using a modification of the method described by Burke and Mayer (1974)
as we have recently reported (Peters et al., 2004). Directly following the AhR-EGFP assay,
the PBS in the well plates was replaced with serum-free medium supplemented with 5 mM
MgCl2, 5 mM 7-ethoxyresorufin (7-ER), and 10 mM dicumarol. Metabolic conversion of 7ER into the fluorescent resorufin product was followed over a 10 min period at 37 °C using
an excitation wavelength of 530 nm and emission wavelength of 590 nm.
2.5. Cell viability
After cells were incubated with the designated compounds for 72 h, they were washed andmedium was replaced with a 1 mg/ml MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5diphenyltetrazolium bromide) solution. The conversion of MTT to formazan in the presenceof the mitochondrial enzyme succinate dehydrogenase was allowed for 1 h at 37 °C (Denizot

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 5

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

and Lang, 1986). After the incubation period, cells were washed and the formazan was
extracted by adding 0.1 ml of isopropanol and measured spectrophotometrically (595 nm).
The results were expressed as % of cell viability compared to the vehicle control DMSO
(100% viable cells).
2.6. Statistical analysis
All experiments were carried out three times, in triplicate. Statistical differences among
treatments were determined by a two-tailed Student t-test, with a level of statisticalsignificance of 95% (p < 0.05).

3. Results
Singular exposure with either TCDD or PCB-126 or the MO-PCBs did not result in any
cytotoxicity in either cell lines as measured with the MTT assay. The highest concentration
tested for the PCBs was 10 μM since higher concentrations resulted in a visible suspension,
likely resulting from the limited solubility of the chemicals. Co-exposure of the cells to
TCDD and PCB-167 resulted in a significant decrease in cell viability for TCDD (≥0.1 μM)
and PCB-167 at 10 μM and thus, these concentrations were therefore excluded from theexperiments.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

3.1. Agonistic effects of mono-ortho PCBs on AhR-EGFP expression
Both TCDD and PCB-126 induced strong AhR-EGFP expression in both mouse H1G1.1c3
and rat H4G1.1c2 cells to a maximum for PCB-126 of 50 ± 7.7% and 83 ± 5.6%,
respectively, compared to TCDD (100%) (Figs. 2A and 3A and Table 2). EC25 and EC50
values for TCDD and PCB-126 were comparable between the two cell lines (Tables 1 and 2)
with REP values for PCB-126 of 0.05 (EC50) and 0.07 (EC25) in the mouse cell line and0.04 (EC50) and 0.07 (EC25) in the rat cell line (Table 2).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The MO-PCBs PCB-105, -118, and -156 produced a significant induction of AhR-EGFP
expression in the mouse cell line to a maximum of 11.4 ± 3.5%, 7.5 ± 1.0%, and 26.8 ±
4.7%, respectively. A higher induction was observed in the rat cell line of 29.6 ± 2.6%, 18.2
± 0.6%, and 62.5 ± 3.5% that of TCDD, respectively (Tables 1 and 2). Since the MO-PCBs
did not reach a maximal induction compared to TCDD, calculation of the EC50 or EC25 wasmerely theoretical and considered not a realistic comparison with TCDD. Therefore,
EC5 TCDD values were also calculated, as previously proposed by Behnisch et al. (2003).
PCB-156 was the most efficacious inducer, resulting in REP values of 0.000004 (EC5 TCDD)
in the mouse cells (Table 1), and 0.000025 (EC5 TCDD) in the rat cell line (Table 2). This isrespectively 125–20 times lower than the current WHO value of 0.0005 (Van den Berg etal., 1998). PCB-105 resulted in 100 (mouse cell line, Table 1) to 50 (rat cell line, Table 2)times lower REP (EC5 TCDD) values than the current WHO value of 0.0001. PCB-118 also
resulted in 50–100 times lower REP (EC5 TCDD) values than the WHO value of 0.0001, in
the mouse and rat cell line, respectively (Tables 1 and 2).
3.2. Agonistic affects of mono-ortho PCBs on EROD activity
As observed in the AhR-EGFP assay, both TCDD and PCB-126 induced EROD activity inmouse and rat cell lines to a maximum for PCB-126 of 58 ± 5.6% and 79 ± 4.1%,
respectively, compared to TCDD (100%) (Figs. 2A and 3A and Tables 1 and 2). EC25 andEC50 values for TCDD were 6.3 × 10−12 M and 1.9 × 10−11 M, respectively in the mouse
cells, and 8.9 × 10−12 M and 1.8 × 10−11 M, respectively in the rat cells. For PCB-126, thesevalues were 7.9 × 10−11 M and 2.2 × 10−10 (EC25 and EC50 values, respectively) in themouse cells, and 1.3 × 10−10 M and 2.1 × 10−10 M (EC25 and EC50 values, respectively) in

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 6

the rat cells (Table 2). This indicates a relative potency for PCB-126 of approximately 0.08
based on both EC50 and EC25 values.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Similar to results obtained in the AhR-EGFP assay, PCB-167 failed to induce EROD
activity. PCB-156 was also the most efficacious inducer of EROD activity, reaching amaximum 20.5 ± 1.5% of TCDD (100%) at a concentration of 5 μM in the mouse cells, and68.0 ± 3.2% of TCDD (100 ± 21%) at a concentration of 10 μM (Tables 1 and 2) in the rat
cells. As the MO-PCBs did not reach a maximal EROD induction compared to TCDD,
calculation of the EC50 or EC25 was merely theoretical and considered not a realisticcomparison with TCDD. Therefore, EC5 TCDD values were again calculated, as previously
proposed by Behnisch et al. (2003). Corresponding REP values for PCB-156 were 0.000019(EC5 TCDD) in the mouse cell line (Table 1) and 0.000045 (EC5 TCDD) in the rat cell line
(Table 2), 26–11 times lower than the WHO value of 0.0005, respectively. REP values for
PCB-105 were <0.000001 (mouse cell line, Table 1) to 0.000002 (rat cell line, Table 2)
based on the EC5 TCDD values, which is 100–50 times lower than the WHO values,
respectively. PCB-118 resulted in REP values of <0.000001–0.000001 based on EC5 TCDD
values in mouse and rat cells, respectively, both 100 times lower than the WHO value of
0.0001 (Tables 1 and 2).
3.3. Antagonistic effects of mono-ortho PCBs on AhR-EGFP expression

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

In contrast to their agonist effects on AhR-mediated gene expression, were more efficacious
inducers in rat cells, antagonistic effects of MO-PCBs were more pronounced in the mouse
cell line. Co-exposure of TCDD (0.001–1 nM) and MO-PCBs (0.1–10 μM) resulted in
repression of TCDD-induced AhR-EGFP expression in the mouse cell line, PCB-167 (1–5μM) and PCB-156 (1–10 μM) had minimal effects on TCDD-induced expression, while
PCB-105 (1–10 μM) and PCB-118 (1–10 μM) reduced the TCDD-induced expression
significantly in the mouse cell line (Fig. 4A) with 10 μM inhibiting to a maximum of 50.9 ±
2.9% and 58.3 ± 2.2%, respectively (Table 3). In the rat cell line, no significant dosedependent antagonistic effects on AhR-EGFP expression were observed at the highest PCB
concentrations (Fig. 5A and Table 3). The EC25 and EC50 values were essentially unaffectedby co-incubation with TCDD/PCB (Table 3); the main inhibitory effect was observed on the
maximal level of inducible AhR-EGFP expression.
3.4. Antagonistic effects of mono-ortho PCBs on EROD activity

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

As observed after the AhR-EFGP assay, co-incubation of TCDD (0.001–1 nM) with MOPCB-105, -118 and -156 resulted in concentration-dependent antagonistic effects on TCDDinduced EROD-activity in the mouse cell line (Fig. 4B) with maximal inhibition of 26.7 ±
9.3% for PCB-105 (5 μM), 46.5 ± 10.4% for PCB-118 (5 μM) and 48.3 ± 4% for PCB-156(10 μM) compared to TCDD (100%) (Table 3). In contrast, no significant antagonistic
effects on EROD activity were observed in the rat cell line.

4. Discussion and conclusion
In our current study the MO-PCBs -105, -118, -156 induced both low levels of AhR-EGFP
expression as well as low EROD activity in both rat and mouse cell lines at concentrations
approximately ≥0.1 μM (Figs. 2 and 3). This indicates and confirms that these MO-PCBs
can cause AhR-mediated in vitro effects in both rodent species, even after an extensive
clean-up procedure to remove more efficacious AhR agonist, though with very low potency
and at high concentrations. The lack of AhR-mediated effects of PCB-167 could be causedby the chlorine substitution pattern. Other authors have found the chlorination pattern to beof importance with respect to the AhR mediated responses of PCBs (Bandiera et al.,
1982;Safe, 1994;Suh et al., 2003). Furthermore, high affinity ligand binding appears to be

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 7

dependent upon key electronic and thermodynamic characteristics of the ligand (Mhin et al.,
2002;Tuppurainen and Ruuskanen, 2000;Waller and McKinney, 1995).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The in vitro and in vivo experimental data that have been obtained concerning the toxicity of
MO-PCBs, has resulted in their inclusion by the World Health Organization (WHO) in thedioxin-TEQ approach (Ahlborg et al., 1994; Van den Berg et al., 1998). The TEF values thatare published by the WHO for risk assessment in humans and animals are consensus values
derived from numerous REPs derived from different in vivo and in vitro studies (Schmitz etal., 1995).
The WHO TEF values for MO-PCBs vary from 1 × 10−5 for PCB-167 to 1 × 10−4
(PCB-105 and PCB-118) (Van den Berg et al., 1998). When comparing the REP values
obtained from our experiments (Tables 1 and 2) with the TEF values assigned by the WHO(Van den Berg et al., 1998), we observed a 11–125-fold difference (based on EC5 TCDD
values as observed for AhR-EGFP expression of PCB-156 in the rat H4G1.1c2 cell line andfor EROD activity after exposure to PCB-156 in the mouse H1G1.1c3 cell line). If these invitro endpoints in both rodent species are assumed to correlate with dioxin-like toxicity of
MO-PCBs, the suggested WHO TEFs (Ahlborg et al., 1994; Van den Berg et al., 1998)
could be an overestimation of approximately one to two orders of magnitude.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

In a recent study, Haws et al. (2006) reported a range of REP values obtained from various
in vitro and in vivo experiments for PCBs. The reported in vitro (REP2004 database) range
for PCB-105 was 7.5 × 10−6 to 0.015 with the WHO TEF value in the 36th percentile. Our
observed REP values are within the 10–25th percentile of these values. For PCB-118, thereported in vitro range was 6 × 10−6 to 0.0011, with the WHO TEF value in the 74th
percentile and our REP values below the 50th percentile. For PCB-156, the reported in vitro
range was 3 × 10−5 to 0.0014; the WHO TEF value was in the 43rd percentile and ourobserved REP values are also below the 50th percentile (Haws et al., 2006). Clearly, thelarge variability between the reported REPs is not only due to the differences between invitro and in vivo data and species differences, but also due to the differences in endpoints.
The endpoints included in this extensive database can vary from biochemical changes tocarcinogenicity studies (Haws et al., 2006).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Antagonistic effects of AhR-active PCBs have been reported previously from both in vivo aswell as in vitro studies (Aarts et al., 1995; Bandiera et al., 1982; Besselink et al., 1998; Deanet al., 2002; Petrulis and Bunce, 1999; Safe, 1994; Sanderson et al., 1996). In our in vitro
mixture experiments antagonistic effects of MO-PCBs (1–10 μM) were observed in themouse H1G1.1c3 cells (Fig. 4). Surprisingly, in the rat H4G1.1c2 cells, these MO-PCBs had
only agonistic potencies (Table 1 and Fig. 3), no antagonistic effects were observed after
exposure in combination with TCDD (Table 3).
Aarts et al. (1995) previously reported a similar finding with mouse cells being moresensitive than rat and human-derived hepatocyte cell lines in respect to AhR-mediatedantagonistic effects of di-ortho PCBs.
With respect to human relevance of the observed AhR-mediated effects of MO-PCBs, it
should be noted that medium concentrations in our in vitro experiments causing minimal
effect were found around 0.1–1 μM. In human blood, concentrations of MO-PCBs areobserved in the nM-range (Kimbrough, 1987; Rogan et al., 1986; Schecter and Piskac,
2001), Assuming in vitro medium concentrations can be used as surrogate for bloodconcentrations, a difference of two to three orders of magnitude is still present. This
indicates AhR mediated effects of MO-PCBs might not easily be achieved in humans.

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 8

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

With respect to the observed antagonism between TCDD and some of these MO-PCBs it
should be noted that these were found at ratios 1 × 104 and 1 × 105 that are also found in
human samples like blood and milk (Kimbrough, 1987; Rogan et al., 1986; Sjodin et al.,2004). Thus, the question remains to which extent the observed antagonism could haverelevance for the human situation. Here we have to keep in mind that our in vitro
experiments were performed at lower concentrations MO-PCBs, and in addition, we
observed strong differences between mouse and rat cells.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

There are several criteria for a compound that should be met for inclusion in the TEF
concept: (1) the compound must bind the Ah receptor; (2) it should elicit dioxin-specificbiochemical and toxic responses; (3) be persistent and accumulate within the food chain(Ahlborg et al., 1994; Van den Berg et al., 1998). Toxic equivalencies (TEQs) can bederived from complicated mixtures of dioxin-like compounds by multiplying the congener
specific concentration with their individual TEF values. When used in this way for risk
assessment, additivity is a prerequisite and this is supported by numerous in vivo and in vitro
studies. Although, as in our study, antagonism or synergism have been reported for mixturesof dioxin-like compounds and PCBs, the magnitude of these non-additive effects is
considered not to comprise this TEF concept significantly when e.g. compared to differences
between species. Results from our present study show that MO-PCBs PCB-105, -118 and-156 should indeed be considered as weak AhR agonists and inclusion in the TEF concept isvalid, but their present WHO TEF values might be too high. Based on our experiments,
PCB-167 should not be considered as AhR agonist. Nevertheless we question if MO-PCBs
used in earlier studies have been sufficiently checked for impurities with potent AhR
agonists like 2,3,7,8-substituted PCDDs, PCDFs, or planar PCBs such as PCB-126. It should
be noted that earlier studies with PCBs or polybrominated diphenyl ethers have also
indicated that these type of impurities could have significant influence on the outcome of astudy when using weak AhR agonists (Giesy and Kannan, 1998; Sanders et al., 2005).

Acknowledgments
This study was financially supported by the Bromine Science and Environmental Forum (BSEF). The rodent AhREGFP cell lines were developed with support by grants from the US National Institutes of Environmental Health
Sciences (ES07685 and ES04699).

References

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Aarts JM, Denison MS, Cox MA, Schalk MA, Garrison PM, Tullis K, de Haan LH, Brouwer A.
Species-specific antagonism of Ah receptor action by 2,2′,5,5′-tetrachloro-and 2,2′,3,3′4,4′hexachlorobiphenyl. Eur J Pharmacol 1995;293:463–474. [PubMed: 8748700]
Ahlborg U, Becking G, Birnbaum L, Brouwer A, Derks H, Feeley M, Golor G, Hanberg A, Larsen J,
Liem A. Toxic equivalency factors for dioxin-like PCBs: report on WHO-ECEH and IPCS
consultation, December 1993. Chemosphere 1994;28:1049–1067.
Ahlborg UG, Brouwer A, Fingerhut MA, Jacobson JL, Jacobson SW, Kennedy SW, Kettrup AAF,
Koeman JH, Poiger H, Rappe C. Impact of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, dibenzofurans, andbiphenyls on human and environmental health, with special emphasis on application of the toxic
equivalency factor concept. Eur J Pharmacol: Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 1992;228:179–199.
Andersson PL, Blom A, Johannisson A, Pesonen M, Tysklind M, Berg AH, Olsson PE, Norrgren L.
Assessment of PCBs and hydroxylated PCBs as potential xenoestrogens: in vitro studies based on
MCF-7 cell proliferation and induction of vitellogenin in primary culture of rainbow trout
hepatocytes. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 1999;37:145–150. [PubMed: 10398763]
Baars AJ, Bakker MI, Baumann RA, Boon PE, Freijer JI, Hoogenboom LA, Hoogerbrugge R, vanKlaveren JD, Liem AK, Traag WA, de Vries J. Dioxins, dioxin-like PCBs and non-dioxin-like
PCBs in foodstuffs: occurrence and dietary intake in The Netherlands. Toxicol Lett 2004;151:51–
61. [PubMed: 15177640]

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 9

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Ballschmiter K, Zell M. Baseline studies of the global pollution I. Occurrence of organohalogens inpristine European and antarctic aquatic environments. Int J Environ Anal Chem 1980;8:15–35.
[PubMed: 7399798]
Bandiera S, Safe S, Okey AB. Binding of poly-chlorinated biphenyls classified as either
phenobarbitone-3-methylcholanthrene- or mixed-type inducers to cytosolic Ah receptor. Chem Biol
Interact 1982;39:259–277. [PubMed: 6804100]
Behnisch PA, Hosoe K, Sakai S. Brominated dioxin-like compounds: in vitro assessment incomparison to classical dioxin-like compounds and other polyaromatic compounds. Environ Int
2003;29:861–877. [PubMed: 12850102]
Besselink HT, Denison MS, Hahn ME, Karchner SI, Vethaak AD, Koeman JH, Brouwer A. Low
inducibility of CYP1A activity by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in Flounder (Platichthys
flesus): characterization of the Ah receptor and the role of CYP1A inhibition*1. Toxicol Sci
1998;43:161–171. [PubMed: 9710958]
Brown DJ, Van Overmeire I, Goeyens L, Denison MS, DeVito MJ, Clark GC. Analysis of Ah receptor
pathway activation by brominated flame retardants. Chemosphere 2003;55:1509–1518. [PubMed:
15099731]
Burke MD, Mayer RT. Ethoxyresorufin: direct fluorimetric assay of a microsomal O-dealkylation
which is preferentially inducible by 3-methylcholanthrene. Drug Metab Dispos 1974;2:583–588.
[PubMed: 4155680]
Chen G, Bunce NJ. Interaction between halogenated aromatic compounds in the Ah receptor signaltransduction pathway. Environ Toxicol 2004;19:480–489. [PubMed: 15352264]
Dean CE Jr, Benjamin SA, Chubb LS, Tessari JD, Keefe TJ. Nonadditive hepatic tumor promoting
effects by a mixture of two structurally different polychlorinated biphenyls in female rat livers.
Toxicol Sci 2002;66:54–61. [PubMed: 11861972]
Denison M, Pandini A, Nagy S, Baldwin E, Bonati L. Ligand binding and activation of the Ah
receptor. Chem Biol Interact 2002;141:3. [PubMed: 12213382]
Denison MS, Heath-Pagliuso S. The Ah receptor: a regulator of the biochemical and toxicologicalactions of structurally diverse chemicals. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 1998;61:557–568.
[PubMed: 9841714]
Denison MS, Zhao B, Baston DS, Clark GC, Murata H, Han D. Recombinant cell bioassay systems forthe detection and relative quantitation of halogenated dioxins and related chemicals. Talanta
2004;63:1123–1133. [PubMed: 18969542]
Denizot F, Lang R. Rapid colorimetric assay for cell growth and survival. Modifications to thetetrazolium dye procedure giving improved sensitivity and reliability. J Immunol Methods
1986;89:271–277. [PubMed: 3486233]
DeVito, M.; Walker, N.; Birnbaum, L. The influence of chemical impurity on estimating relative
potenct factors for PCBs. Organohalogen Compounds; Boston: 2003. p. 60-65.
DeVito MJ, Maier WE, Diliberto JJ, Birnbaum LS. Comparative ability of various PCBs, PCDFs, and
TCDD to induce Cytochrome P450 1A1 and 1A2 activity following 4 weeks of treatment. Fund
Appl Toxicol 1993;20:125–130.
Endo F, Monsees TK, Akaza H, Schill WB, Pflieger-Bruss S. Effects of single non-ortho, mono-ortho,and di-ortho chlorinated biphenyls on cell functions and proliferation of the human prostatic
carcinoma cell line LNCaP. Reprod Toxicol 2003;17:229–236. [PubMed: 12642156]
Galietta LJ, Haggie PM, Verkman AS. Green fluorescent protein-based halide indicators withimproved chloride and iodide affinities. FEBS Lett 2001;499:220–224. [PubMed: 11423120]
Giesy JP, Kannan K. Dioxin-like and non-dioxin-like toxic effects of polychlorinated biphenyls(PCBs): implications for risk assessment. Crit Rev Toxicol 1998;28:511–569. [PubMed: 9861526]
Guengerich FP. Cytochrome P450 enzymes. Am Sci 1993;81:440–447.
Hahn ME. Aryl hydrocarbon receptors: diversity and evolution1. Chem-Biol Interact 2002;141:131–
160. [PubMed: 12213389]
Hankinson O. Role of coactivators in transcriptional activation by the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. Arch
Biochem Biophys 2005;433:379–386. [PubMed: 15581594]
Haws, L.; Harris, M.; Su, S.; Walker, NJ.; Birnbaum, L.; DeVito, MJ.; Farland, W.; Connor, K.;
Santamaria, A.; Finley, B. A preliminary approach to characterizing variability and uncertainty in

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 10

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

the mammalian PCDD/F and PCB TEFs. Vol. 66. Organohalogen Compounds; Berlin: 2004. p.
3439-3445.
Haws L, Su S, Harris M, DeVito MJ, Walker NJ, Farland W, Finley B, Birnbaum LS. Development ofa refined database of mammalian relative potency estimates for dioxin-like compounds. Toxicol
Sci 2006;89:4–30. [PubMed: 16120753]
Hestermann EV, Stegeman JJ, Hahn ME. Relative contributions of affinity and intrinsic efficacy toaryl hydrocarbon receptor ligand potency. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2000;168:160–172. [PubMed:
11032772]
Hong CS, Xiao J, Bush B, Shaw SD. Environmental occurrence and potential toxicity of planar,
mono-, and di-ortho poly-chlorinated biphenyls in the biota. Chemosphere 1998;36:1637–1651.
[PubMed: 9503581]
Kimbrough RD. Human health effects of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polybrominatedbiphenyls (PBBs). Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 1987;27:87–111. [PubMed: 3034142]
Koistinen J, Sanderson J, Giesy J, Nevalainen T, Paasivirta J. Ethoxyresorufin-o-deethylase induction
potency of poly-chlorinated diphenyl ethers in H4IIE rat hepatoma cells. Environ Toxicol Chem
1996;15:2028–2034.
Kuramoto N, Goto E, Masamune Y, Gion K, Yoneda Y. Existence of xenobiotic response elementbinding in Dic-tyostelium. Biochim Biophys Acta 2002;1578:1–11. [PubMed: 12393182]
Kuriyama S, Fidalgo-Neto A, Mathar W, Palavinskas R, Friedrich K, Chahoud I. Effect of low dosemono-ortho 2,3′,4,4′,5 pentachlorobiphenyl on thyroid hormone status and EROD activity in rat
offspring: consequences for risk assessment. Toxicology 2003;186:11–20. [PubMed: 12604167]
Lees MJ, Whitelaw ML. Multiple roles of ligand in transforming the dioxin receptor to an active basic
helix-loop-helix/PAS transcription factor complex with the nuclear protein Arnt. Mol Cell Biol
1999;19:5811–5822. [PubMed: 10409767]
Marsh G, Hu J, Jakobsson E, Rahm S, Bergman A. Synthesis and characterization of 32
polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Environ Sci Technol 1999;33:3033–3037.
Mhin BJ, Lee JE, Choi W. Understanding the congener-specific toxicity in polychlorinated dibenzo-pdioxins: chlorination pattern and molecular quadrupole moment. J Am Chem Soc 2002;124:144–
148. [PubMed: 11772071]
Mimura J, Ema M, Sogawa K, Fujii-Kuriyama Y. Identification of a novel mechanism of regulation ofAh (dioxin) receptor function. Genes Dev 1999;13:20–25. [PubMed: 9887096]
Nagy SR, Sanborn JR, Hammock BD, Denison MS. Development of a green fluorescent protein-based
cell bioassay for the rapid and inexpensive detection and characterization of Ah receptor agonists.
Toxicol Sci 2002;65:200–210. [PubMed: 11812924]
Nebert DW, Gonzalez FJ. P450 genes: structure, evolution, and regulation. Annu Rev Biochem
1987;56:945–993. [PubMed: 3304150]
Peters AK, van Londen K, Bergman A, Bohonowych J, Denison MS, van den Berg M, Sanderson JT.
Effects of poly-brominated diphenyl ethers on basal and TCDD-induced ethoxyre-sorufin activity
and Cytochrome P450-1A1 expression in MCF-7, HepG2, and H4IIE cells. Toxicol Sci
2004;82:488–496. (Epub September 29, 2004). [PubMed: 15456928]
Petrulis JR, Bunce NJ. Competitive inhibition by inducer as a confounding factor in the use of theethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) assay to estimate exposure to dioxin-like compounds.
Toxicol Lett 1999;105:251–260. [PubMed: 10355546]
Rogan WJ, Gladen BC, McKinney JD, Carreras N, Hardy P, Thullen J, Tingelstad J, Tully M.
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dichlorodiphenyl dichloroethene (DDE) in human milk:
effects of maternal factors and previous lactation. Am J Public Health 1986;76:172–177.
[PubMed: 3080910]
Safe SH. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), dibenzofurans (PCDFs), andrelated compounds: environmental and mechanistic considerations which support the developmentof toxic equivalency factors (TEFs). Crit Rev Toxicol 1990;21:51–88. [PubMed: 2124811]
Safe SH. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): environmental impact, biochemical and toxic responses,
and implications for risk assessment. Crit Rev Toxicol 1994;24:87–149. [PubMed: 8037844]

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 11

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Sanders JM, Burka LT, Smith CS, Black W, James R, Cunningham ML. Differential expression of
CYP1A, 2B, and 3A genes in the F344 rat following exposure to a polybrominated diphenyl ether
mixture or individual components. Toxicol Sci 2005;88
Sanderson JT, Aarts JM, Brouwer A, Froese KL, Denison MS, Giesy JP. Comparison of Ah receptormediated luciferase and ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase induction in H4IIE cells: implications fortheir use as bioanalytical tools for the detection of polyhalogenated aromatic hydrocarbons.
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1996;137:316–325. [PubMed: 8661358]
Schecter, A.; Piskac, AL. PCBs, dioxins, and dibenzofurans; measured levels and toxic equivalents inblood, milk and food from various countries. In: Robertson, LW.; Hansen, LG., editors. PCBs,
Recent Advances in Environmental Toxicology and Health Effects. The University Press of
Kentucky; Kentucky: 2001. p. 161-168.
Schmitz HJ, Hagenmaier A, Hagenmaier HP, Bock KW, Schrenk D. Potency of mixtures ofpolychlorinated biphenyls as inducers of dioxin receptor-regulated CYP1A activity in rat
hepatocytes and H4IIE cells. Toxicology 1995;99:47–54. [PubMed: 7762001]
Shadel BN, Evans RG, Roberts D, Clardy S, Jordan-Izaguirre D, Patterson DG Jr, Needham LL.
Background levels of non-ortho-substituted (coplanar) polychlorinated biphenyls in human serumof Missouri residents. Chemosphere 2001;43:967–976. [PubMed: 11372890]
Sjodin A, Jones RS, Focant JF, Lapeza C, Wang RY, McGa-hee EE III, Zhang Y, Turner WE, Slazyk
B, Needham LL, Patterson DG Jr. Retrospective time-trend study of polybrominated diphenyl
ether and polybrominated and polychlorinated biphenyl levels in human serum from the UnitedStates. Environ Health Perspect 2004;112:654–658. [PubMed: 15121506]
Suh J, Kang JS, Yang KH, Kaminski NE. Antagonism of aryl hydrocarbon receptor-dependent
induction of CYP1A1 and inhibition of IgM expression by di-ortho-substituted polychlorinatedbiphenyls. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2003;187:11–21. [PubMed: 12628580]
Tuppurainen K, Ruuskanen J. Electronic eigenvalue (EEVA): a new QSAR/QSPR descriptor forelectronic substituent effects based on molecular orbital energies. A QSAR approach to the Ah
receptor binding affinity of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) anddibenzofurans (PCDFs). Chemosphere 2000;41:843–848. [PubMed: 10864156]
Van den Berg M, Birnbaum L, Bosveld AT, Brunstrom B, Cook P, Feeley M, Giesy JP, Hanberg A,
Hasegawa R, Kennedy SW, Kubiak T, Larsen JC, van Leeuwen FX, Liem AK, Nolt C, Peterson
RE, Poellinger L, Safe S, Schrenk D, Tillitt D, Tysklind M, Younes M, Waern F, Zacharewski T.
Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs PCDFs for humans and wildlife. Environ
Health Perspect 1998;106:775–792. [PubMed: 9831538]
Van der Burght AS, Clijsters PJ, Horbach GJ, Andersson PL, Tysklind M, van den Berg M. Structuredependent induction of CYP1A by polychlorinated biphenyls in hepatocytes of cynomolgus
monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1999;155:13–23. [PubMed: 10036214]
Van der Burght AS, Kreikamp AP, Horbach GJ, Seinen W, Van Den Berg M. Characterization of
CYP1A in hepatocytes of cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) and induction by different
substituted polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Arch Toxicol 1998;72:630–636. [PubMed:
9851678]
Waller CL, McKinney JD. Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships of dioxins
and dioxin-like compounds: model validation and Ah receptor characterization. Chem Res Toxicol
1995;8:847–858. [PubMed: 7492734]
Whitlock JP Jr, Okino ST, Dong L, Ko HP, Clarke-Katzenberg R, Ma Q, Li H. Cytochromes P450 5:
induction of cytochrome P4501A1: a model for analyzing mammalian gene transcription. FASEBJ 1996;10:809–818. [PubMed: 8666157]
Zeiger M, Haag R, Hockel J, Schrenk D, Schmitz HJ. Inducing effects of dioxin-like polychlorinatedbiphenyls on CYP1A in the human hepatoblastoma cell line HepG2, the rat hepatoma cell line
H4IIE, and rat primary hepatocytes: comparison of relative potencies. Toxicol Sci: An Off J Soc
Toxicol 2001;63:65–73.

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 12

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Fig. 1.

Structure of the compounds used in this study.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 13

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Fig. 2.

Induction of AhR-dependent gene expression by TCDD, PCB-126 and MO-PCBs in
recombinant mouse hepatoma cells. H1G1.1c3 cells were incubated with DMSO, TCDD
(0.001–1 nM), PCB-126 (0.001–10 nM) or mono-ortho PCBs (0–10 μM) for 72 h and AhREGFP expression (A) or EROD activity (B) measured as described in Section 2. The data
are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. (n = 3).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 14

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Fig. 3.

Induction of AhR-dependent gene expression by TCDD, PCB-126 and MO-PCBs in
recombinant rat hepatoma cells. H4G1.1c2 cells were incubated with DMSO, TCDD
(0.001–1 nM), PCB-126 (0.001–10 nM) or mono-ortho PCBs (0–10 μM) for 72 h and AhREGFP expression (A) or EROD activity (B) measured as described in Section 2. The data
are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. (n = 3).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 15

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Fig. 4.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Effects of MO-PCB -105 and -167 on the induction of AhR-dependent gene expression by
TCDD in recombinant mouse hepatoma cells. H1G1.1c3 cells were incubated with DMSO,TCDD (0.001–1 nM), TCDD and PCB-105 (0–10 μM) or TCDD and PCB-167 (0–10 μM)
for 72 h and AhR-EGFP expression (A) or EROD activity (B) measured as described in
Section 2. The data are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. (n = 3).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

Peters et al.

Page 16

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Fig. 5.

Effects of MO-PCB -105 and -167 on the induction of AhR-dependent gene expression by
TCDD in recombinant rat hepatoma cells. H4G1.1c2 cells were incubated with DMSO,TCDD (0.001–1 nM), TCDD and PCB-105 (0–10 μM) or TCDD and PCB-167 (0–10 μM)
for 72 h and AhR-EGFP expression (A) or EROD activity (B) measured as described in
Section 2. The data are expressed as mean ± S.E.M. (n = 3).

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

EC5 TCDD (nM)

EC25 (nM)

EC50 (nM)
Concentration

EC25 (nM)

EC50 (nM)

Concentration

10 μM

10 μM
5 μM

<1 × 10−5

2.99 × 10−7

PCB-118

PCB-156nd

20.5 ± 1.5*

5.2 ± 0.67*

5.6 ± 0.63*

58.2 ± 5.8*

100 ± 8.4*

EROD

nd

26.8 ± 4.7

7.5 ± 1.0*

11.4 ± 3.5*50 ± 7.7*

100 ± 4.7*

AhR-EGFP

Statistically significant compared to the vehicle control (DMSO 0.1%) (p < 0.05).

*

The data are presented as one representative experiment (±S.E.M.), conducted in triplicate.

PCB-167

10 μM<1 × 10−5

PCB-105

5 μM

1 nM

PCB-126

2.2 × 10−10

7.9 × 10−11

3.20 × 10−10

1.9 × 10−11

6.3 × 10−12

5.60 × 10−12

TCDD

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs on EROD activity in mouse H1G1.1c3 cells

Compound

EC5 TCDD (nM)

5.60 × 10−7

PCB-156

PCB-167

5 μM

1.58 × 10−6

PCB-118
1.3 × 10−6

10 μM

1.78 × 10−6

5 μM

PCB-105

7.50 × 10−10

3.98 × 10−10

2 × 10−10

1 nM

PCB-126

3.98 × 10−11

1.58 × 10−11

2.51 × 10−12

TCDD

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs on AhR-EGFP expression in mouse H1G1.1c3 cells

Compound

0.000019<0.000001<0.000001

0.02

1

REP value (EC5 TCDD)

0.000004

0.000002

0.000001

0.01

1

REP value (EC5 TCDD)

0.04

1

REP value (EC25)

0.000023

0.08

1

REP value (EC25)

0.1

1

REP value (EC50)

0.05

1

REP value (EC50)

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs, TCDD, and PCB-126 on AhR-EGFP expression and EROD activity in stably transfected mouse hepatoma (H1G1.1c3) cells

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Table 1
Peters et al.
Page 17

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

EC5 TCDD (nM)

EC25 (nM)

EC50 (nM)
Concentration

EC25 (nM)

EC50 (nM)

2.8 × 10−7

5 μM

1.10 × 10−7

PCB-156

3.2 × 10−7

Statistically significant compared to the vehicle control (DMSO 0.1%) (p < 0.05).

*

nd

68 ± 3.2*

7 ± 0.3*

19 ± 0.8*79 ± 4.1*

100 ± 21*

EROD

nd

62.5 ± 3.4*

18.2 ± 0.6*

29.6 ± 2.6*

83 ± 5.6*

100 ± 14.7*

AhR-EGFPThe data are presented as one representative experiment (±S.E.M.), conducted in triplicate.

PCB-167

10 μM

5.60 × 10−6

PCB-118
2.8 × 10−7

10 μM

2.50 × 10−6

5 μM

PCB-105

2.11 × 10−10

1.26 × 10−10

5.6 × 10−11

PCB-126

1 nM

8.9 × 10−12

5 × 10−12

TCDD

1.78 × 10−11

10 μM

Concentration

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs on EROD activity in rat H4G1.c1 cells

Compound

EC5 TCDD (nM)

7.08 × 10−8

PCB-156

PCB-167

5 μM

1.58 × 10−6

PCB-118
1 × 10−7

10 μM

5.6 × 10−7

1 × 10−6

5 μM

PCB-105

8.9 × 10−10

4.5 × 10−10

2 × 10−10

1 nM

PCB-126

4.0 × 10−11

1.50 × 10−11

1.78 × 10−12

TCDD

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs on AhR-EGFP expression in rat H4G1.c1 cells

Compound

0.000045

0.000001

0.000002

0.1

1

REP value (EC5 TCDD)

0.000025

0.000001

0.000002

0.01

1

REP value (EC5 TCDD)

0.000150

0.03

1

REP value (EC25)

0.000032

0.000004

0.07

1

REP value (EC25)

0.000056

0.08

1

REP value (EC50)

0.000140

0.04

1

REP value (EC50)

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs, TCDD, and PCB-126 on AhR-EGFP expression and EROD activity in stably transfected rat hepatoma (H4G1.1c2) cells

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Table 2
Peters et al.
Page 18

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Concentration (μM)

EC25 (nM)

EC50 (nM)
AhR-EGFP

Compound5.6 × 10−11

1.12 × 10−1153.55 × 10−11
4.5 × 10−11
3.55 × 10−11
5 × 10−11
3.3 × 10−11
8.9 × 10−11
4.5 × 10−11
2.5 × 10−11
3.55 × 10−11
3.55 × 10−11

6.31 × 10−13
3.5 × 10−11
8.9 × 10−12
5 × 10−12
1.3 × 10−11
3.2 × 10−11
1.8 × 10−11
8.9 × 10−12
1.12 × 10−11
1 × 10−11

1
5
10
1
5
10
0.1
1
5

10

2.24 × 10−11

8.51 × 10−121

89.7 ± 6.4

87 ± 12.2

97.7 ± 8.4

70.8 ± 1.3*

99.1 ± 3.4

90.9 ± 14.9

58.3 ± 2.2*

42.3 ± 11*73.7 ± 2.2*

50.9 ± 2.9*56 ± 8.4*

58 ± 4.5*

PCB-167

PCB-156

PCB-118

PCB-105

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.

PCB-167

PCB-156

PCB-118

PCB-105

3.2 × 10−11
4.5 × 10−11
2.1 × 10−11
1.4 × 10−11
1.8 × 10−11
4.2 × 10−11
1.6 × 10−10
1.3 × 10−10
2.0 × 10−10
1.1 × 10−11
1.4 × 10−11

1 × 10−11
4.0 × 10−13
1.3 × 10−13
7.1 × 10−12
2.8 × 10−12
6.7 × 10−12
1.4 × 10−10
2.2 × 10−11
1 × 10−10
5.6 × 10−12
5.6 × 10−12

1
5
10
1
5
10
1
5
10
0.1
1

40.2 ± 14.3*

59.2 ± 22.8

64.8 ± 1.3*

75.7 ± 4.2

54.2 ± 7.8

66.0 ± 5.4

42.0 ± 2137.7 ± 7.6*

76.0 ± 7.2

51.8 ± 16.987 ± 10.4

PCB-167

PCB-156

PCB-118

PCB-105

Effects of mono-ortho-PCBs in TCDD-induced AhR-expression and EROD activity in rat H4G1.1c2 cells

PCB-167

PCB-156

PCB-118

PCB-105

1

0.1

10

5

1

10

5

1

10

5

1

5

1

0.1

10

5

1

10

5

1

10

5

1

Concentration (μM)

Effects of mono-ortho-PCBs in TCDD-induced AhR-expression and EROD activity in mouse H1G1.1c3 cells

Compound7.9 × 10−12

7.9 × 10−12

1 × 10−11

2.2 × 10−12

1 × 10−10

1.2 × 10−11

1.1 × 10−11

1.1 × 10−11

4.5 × 10−13

1.2 × 10−11

1.3 × 10−11

1.6 × 10−11

1.6 × 10−11

1.6 × 10−11

3.2 × 10−11

2.0 × 10−11

1 × 10−12

1.1 × 10−11

1.3 × 10−11

1.9 × 10−11

6.7 × 10−12

1 × 10−11

1.6 × 10−11

EC25 (nM)

1.4 × 10−11

1.5 × 10−11

5 × 10−11

1 × 10−10

1.5 × 10−10

3.5 × 10−11

2.5 × 10−11

1.8 × 10−11

3.2 × 10−11

3.9 × 10−11

2.7 × 10−11

4.0 × 10−11

4.0 × 10−11

3.8 × 10−11

7.1 × 10−11

4.2 × 10−11

1.3 × 10−11

6.3 × 10−11

3.8 × 10−11

4.2 × 10−11

3.5 × 10−11

3.2 × 10−11

4.0 × 10−11

EC50 (nM)

86.0 ± 17.1

123.0 ± 34

85.0 ± 3.7

129.0 ± 20.1

105.0 ± 17.3

65.0 ± 12.6

72.0 ± 17.9

94.0 ± 1896.0 ± 5.3

68.0 ± 12.2

97.0 ± 1486.2 ± 3.4

74.8 ± 4.8*77 ± 12.7

48.3 ± 4.0*

67 ± 5.0*

81.2 ± 9.5

51.1 ± 1.3*

46.5 ± 10.4*

82.8 ± 3.9

39.3 ± 2.8*

26.7 ± 9.3*

57 ± 4.8*

EROD

Effects of mono-ortho PCBs on TCDD-induced AhR-EGFP expression and TCDD-induced EROD activity in stably transfected mouse hepatoma(H1G1.1c3) and rat hepatoma (H4G1.1c2) cells

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Table 3
Peters et al.
Page 19

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
1.5 × 10−11

5 × 10−12583.1 ± 10.6

AhR-EGFP

CompoundStatistically significant compared to the positive control (TCDD 1 nM) (p < 0.05).

*

The data are presented as one representative experiment (±S.E.M.), conducted in triplicate.

EC50 (nM)

EC25 (nM)

NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Concentration (μM)
5Concentration (μM)
7.6 × 10−11

EC25 (nM)
1.4 × 10−11

EC50 (nM)

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Compound131.0 ± 2.7

ERODPeters et al.
Page 20

Toxicol Lett. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 February 2.