Toxicity screening of bisphenol A replacement compounds: cytotoxicity and mRNA expression in LMH 3D spheroids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously, we showed that the chicken LMH cell line cultured as 3D spheroids may be a suitable animal free alternative to primary chicken embryonic hepatocytes (CEH) for avian in vitro chemical screening. In this study, cytotoxicity and mRNA expression were determined in LMH 3D spheroids following exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), five BPA replacement compounds (BPF, TGSH, DD-70, BPAF, BPSIP), and 17β estradiol (E2). Results were compared to an earlier study that evaluated the same endpoints for these chemicals in CEH. BPA and the replacement compounds had LC50 values ranging from 16.6 to 81.8 μM; DD-70 and BPAF were the most cytotoxic replacements (LC50 = 17.23 ± 4.51 and 16.6 ± 4.78 μM). TGSH and DD-70 modulated the greatest number of genes, although fewer than observed in CEH. Based on the expression of apovitellenin and vitellogenin, BPAF was the most estrogenic compound followed by BPF, BPSIP, and BPA. More estrogen-responsive genes were modulated in LMH spheroids compared to CEH. Concentration-dependent gene expression revealed that DD-70 and BPAF altered genes related to lipid and bile acid regulation. Overall, cytotoxicity and clustering of replacements based on gene expression profiles were similar between LMH spheroids and CEH. In addition to generating novel gene expression data for five BPA replacement compounds in an in vitro avian model, this research demonstrates that LMH spheroids may represent a useful animal free alternative for avian toxicity testing.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".