Adipogenic Effects and Gene Expression Profiling of Firemaster® 550 Components in Human Primary Preadipocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to flame retardants has been associated with negative health outcomes including metabolic effects. As polybrominated diphenyl ether flame retardants were pulled from commerce, human exposure to new flame retardants such as Firemaster® 550 (FM550) has increased. Although previous studies in murine systems have shown that FM550 and its main components increase adipogenesis, the effects of FM550 in human models have not been elucidated. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine if FM550 and its components are active in human preadipocytes, and to further investigate their mode of action. METHODS: Human primary preadipocytes were differentiated in the presence of FM550 and its components. Differentiation was assessed by lipid accumulation and expression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARG), fatty acid binding protein (FABP) 4 and lipoprotein lipase (LPL). mRNA was collected for Poly (A) RNA sequencing and was used to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Functional analysis of DEGs was undertaken in Ingenuity Pathway Analysis. RESULTS: FM550 triphenyl phosphate (TPP) and isopropylated triphenyl phosphates (IPTP), increased adipogenesis in human primary preadipocytes as assessed by lipid accumulation and mRNA expression of regulators of adipogenesis such as PPARγ, CCAAT enhancer binding protein (C/EBP) α and sterol regulatory element binding protein (SREBP) 1 as well as the adipogenic markers FABP4 LPL and perilipin. Poly (A) RNA sequencing analysis revealed potential modes of action including liver X receptor/retinoid X receptor (LXR/RXR) activation, thyroid receptor (TR)/RXR, protein kinase A, and nuclear receptor subfamily 1 group H members activation. CONCLUSIONS: We found that FM550, and two of its components, induced adipogenesis in human primary preadipocytes. Further, using global gene expression analysis we showed that both TPP and IPTP likely exert their effects through PPARG to induce adipogenesis. In addition, IPTP perturbed signaling pathways that were not affected by TPP. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1318.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".