Display options
Share it on

Toxicol Rep. 2021 Feb 06;8:581-591. doi: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2021.02.004. eCollection 2021.

Comparison of sulfolane effects in Sprague Dawley rats, B6C3F1/N mice, and Hartley guinea pigs after 28 days of exposure via oral gavage.

Toxicology reports

K A Shipkowski, M C Cora, M F Cesta, V G Robinson, S Waidyanatha, K L Witt, M K Vallant, D M Fallacara, M R Hejtmancik, S A Masten, S D Cooper, R A Fernando, C R Blystone

Affiliations

  1. Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  2. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH, USA.
  3. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.

PMID: 33777704 PMCID: PMC7985713 DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2021.02.004

Abstract

Sulfolane is a solvent used in industrial refining with identified environmental exposure in drinking water. Due to potential large species differences, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) conducted 28-day toxicity studies in male and female Hsd:Sprague Dawley® SD® rats, B6C3F1/N mice, and Hartley guinea pigs. A wide dose range of 0, 1, 10, 30, 100, 300, and 800 mg/kg was administered via gavage. Histopathology, clinical pathology, and organ weights were evaluated after 28 days of exposure. In addition, plasma concentrations of sulfolane were evaluated 2 and 24 h after the last dose. Increased mortality was observed in the highest dose group of guinea pigs and mice while decreased body weight was observed in rats compared to controls. Histopathological lesions were observed in the kidney (male rat), stomach (male mice), esophagus (male and female guinea pigs), and nose (male guinea pigs). Plasma concentrations were generally higher in rats and guinea pigs compared to mice with evidence of saturated clearance at higher doses. Male rats appear to be the most sensitive with hyaline droplet accumulation occurring at all doses, although the human relevance of this finding is questionable.

Keywords: Guinea pig; Kidney; Mice; Plasma concentration; Rat; Sulfolane

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no declarations of interest.

References

  1. Environ Technol. 2001 Jun;22(6):619-29 - PubMed
  2. Mutat Res. 2008 Jan 8;649(1-2):101-13 - PubMed
  3. Environ Health Perspect. 1993 Dec;101 Suppl 6:39-44 - PubMed
  4. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol. 1986 Nov-Dec;8(6):687-93 - PubMed
  5. Xenobiotica. 2020 Apr;50(4):442-453 - PubMed
  6. Biometrics. 1986 Mar;42(1):183-6 - PubMed
  7. J Anal Toxicol. 2019 Jul 24;43(6):477-481 - PubMed
  8. Arch Toxicol. 1984 Dec;56(2):123-7 - PubMed
  9. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1985;16(3-4):461-8 - PubMed
  10. Biometrics. 1971 Mar;27(1):103-17 - PubMed
  11. Br J Ind Med. 1966 Oct;23(4):302-4 - PubMed
  12. Mutat Res. 2007 Dec 1;634(1-2):235-40 - PubMed
  13. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1979 Apr;62(4):957-74 - PubMed
  14. Biometrics. 1972 Jun;28(2):519-31 - PubMed
  15. Res Commun Chem Pathol Pharmacol. 1976 Nov;15(3):571-80 - PubMed
  16. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1995 Jul;56(7):651-60 - PubMed
  17. Toxicol Sci. 2006 Nov;94(1):92-107 - PubMed
  18. Toxicol Pathol. 1997 Nov-Dec;25(6):582-9 - PubMed
  19. Environ Res. 1986 Jun;40(1):92-7 - PubMed
  20. Hua Xi Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 1988 Mar;19(1):61-4 - PubMed
  21. Toxicol Lett. 1985 Nov;28(2-3):111-6 - PubMed
  22. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2019 Sep 15;379:114690 - PubMed
  23. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1977 Jun;40(3):463-72 - PubMed
  24. Biometrics. 1977 Jun;33(2):386-9 - PubMed
  25. Neurotoxicology. 1989 Spring;10(1):53-62 - PubMed
  26. Hua Xi Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 1987 Dec;18(4):376-80 - PubMed

Publication Types