In all vertebrate species, estrogens play a crucial role in the development, growth, and function of reproductive and nonreproductive tissues. A large number of natural or synthetic chemicals present in the environment and diet can interfere with estrogen signaling; these chemicals are called endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) or xenoestrogens. Some of these compounds have been shown to induce adverse effects on human and animal health, and some compounds are suspected to contribute to diverse disease development. Because xenoestrogens have varying sources and structures and could act in additive or synergistic effects when combined, they have multiple mechanisms of action. Consequently, an important panel of in vivo and in vitro bioassays and chemical analytical tools was used to screen, evaluate, and characterize the potential impacts of these compounds on humans and animals. In this paper, we discuss different molecular actions of some of the major xenoestrogens found in food or the environment, and we summarize the current models used to evaluate environmental estrogens.
PMID 23737774 23737774 DOI 10.1155/2013/501851 10.1155/2013/501851 Kerdivel et al. 2013, Kerdivel 2013
Cite this article
Kerdivel, G., Habauzit, D., & Pakdel, F. (2013). Assessment and Molecular Actions of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals That Interfere with Estrogen Receptor Pathways. International Journal of Endocrinology. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/501851
Kerdivel G, Habauzit D, Pakdel F. Assessment and Molecular Actions of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals That Interfere with Estrogen Receptor Pathways. International Journal of Endocrinology. 2013. doi:10.1155/2013/501851
Kerdivel, G., et al. "Assessment and Molecular Actions of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals That Interfere with Estrogen Receptor Pathways." International Journal of Endocrinology, 2013.
Prada D et al., 2025·Environmental health : a global access science source
Acetaminophen is the most commonly used over-the-counter pain and fever medication taken during pregnancy, with > 50% of pregnant women using acetaminophen worldwide. Numerous well-designed studies have indicated that pregnant mothers exposed to acetaminophen have children diagnosed with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), at higher rates than children of pregnant mothers who were not exposed to acetaminophen. We applied the Navigation Guide methodology to the scientific literature to comprehensively and objectively examine the association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and NDDs and related symptomology in offspring. We conducted a systematic PubMed search through February 25, 2025, using predefined inclusion criteria and rated studies based on risk of bias and strength of evidence. Due to substantial heterogeneity, we opted for a qualitative synthesis, consistent with the Navigation Guide's focus on environmental health evidence. We identified 46 studies for inclusion in our analysis. Of these, 27 studies reported positive associations (significant links to NDDs), 9 showed null associations (no significant link), and 4 indicated negative associations (protective effects). Higher-quality studies were more likely to show positive associations. Overall, the majority of the studies reported positive associations of prenatal acetaminophen use with ADHD, ASD, or NDDs in offspring, with risk-of-bias and strength-of-evidence ratings informing the overall synthesis. Our analyses using the Navigation Guide thus support evidence consistent with an association between acetaminophen exposure during pregnancy and increased incidence of NDDs. Appropriate and immediate steps should be taken to advise pregnant women to limit acetaminophen consumption to protect their offspring's neurodevelopment.
Restorative Care and Assisted Reproduction · Outcome Comparisons
Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) aims to restore fertility by diagnosing and treating the underlying causes of infertility. RRM is frequently promoted as an alternative to assisted reproductive technology (ART), despite uncertainty regarding its comparative effectiveness and safety. Where delayed childbearing and infertility are becoming more common, reliance on optimization of natural physiology alone may delay effective treatment and compromise reproductive outcomes. A systematic review of the current evidence comparing RRM to either ART or unassisted conception is, therefore, essential to inform clinical practice, guideline development, and shared decision-making for patients experiencing infertility. To assess the effectiveness and safety of RRM approaches, evaluated as a whole, rather than as individual components, compared with ART and medically unassisted conception in couples experiencing infertility. A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and the Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine from inception to 28 November 2025. We included randomized control trials (RCTs) or nonrandomized comparative studies evaluating reproductive and safety outcomes of RRM as a unified treatment, compared with either ART or expectant management (attempted medically unassisted conception). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We retrieved 724 records, of which 16 studies underwent full-text review. No RCTs or comparative observational studies were identified. All 16 full-text studies were excluded for an ineligible study design (no control group); most were cohort studies in which all participants underwent RRM. Ten studies reported reproductive outcomes; nine of these made claims regarding the benefits or effectiveness of RRM. None of these claims were supported by the study designs used, as the lack of a comparison group precludes reliable estimation of treatment effects. Consequently, these studies cannot provide valid estimates of RRM success rates, nor permit any meaningful inference about its effectiveness relative to unassisted conception or ART. Large-scale RCTs or prospective cohort studies reporting effectiveness and safety outcomes are required to inform evidence-based fertility guidelines. There are no comparative studies to support reliable estimates of the safety and effectiveness of RRM compared with ART or medically unassisted conception for couples experiencing infertility.
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the relationship between menstrual cycle phases and the incidence of muscle injuries in female team sport athletes, following PRISMA 2020 and PERSiST guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus from inception to mid-January 2024. Studies were included if they examined female team sport athletes of reproductive age with regular menstrual cycles and compared the occurrence of muscle injuries across at least two menstrual phases. Studies involving hormonal contraceptive use, medications affecting the menstrual cycle or musculoskeletal system, or menstrual dysfunction were excluded. Three studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 318 participants. Meta-analysis yielded a pooled Risk Ratio of 1.18 (95% CI: 0.75 to 1.86, p = 0.46) for injury risk between the luteal and follicular phases, suggesting no statistically significant association. However, the certainty of the cumulative evidence was rated as very low due to methodological limitations, including inconsistent phase classifications and reliance on imprecise methods for identifying menstrual phases. Consequently, no practical or clinical recommendations can be made at this time. Future research employing standardised, physiologically accurate methods for classifying and detecting menstrual cycle phases is necessary to better understand the potential links between hormonal fluctuations and injury risk. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-026-36763-0.
Metabolic and Endocrine Agents · GLP-1 Receptor Agonists
Song E et al., 2026·Frontiers in nutrition·
Open Access
GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) address key metabolic drivers of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS), yet their integration into fertility management remains challenging because reproductive efficacy is variably reported, preconception washout is required, and standardized clinical pathways are lacking. We present a structured, fertility-centered, hypothesis-generating narrative synthesis of the metabolic-reproductive-pregnancy continuum in PCOS, integrating evidence from randomized trials, observational studies, reviews, and clinical guidance. Heterogeneous findings are organized by intervention/comparator, follow-up window, and key effect modifiers, including baseline obesity/insulin-resistance phenotype, concomitant metformin, and lifestyle co-interventions. The clinical framework is derived from this narrative synthesis rather than from quantitative reproductive meta-analysis. As a methodological proof-of-concept only, we additionally performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis restricted to body-weight change within a prespecified 12-16-weeks window in the largest connected treatment network. Because ovulation, clinical pregnancy, time to pregnancy, and live birth were inconsistently defined and sparsely reported across trials, no confirmatory quantitative synthesis or treatment ranking was undertaken for these reproductive outcomes. We therefore distinguish evidence domains explicitly, with relatively robust support for short-term metabolic benefit but substantially greater uncertainty for reproductive translation and periconception safety. The narrative evidence supports positioning GLP-1RAs as time-limited, preconception metabolic-optimization tools, not as confirmed fertility-enhancing therapies per se. Their use in PCOS fertility care should be individualized through shared decision-making, with explicit discussion of the difference between established metabolic benefit and hypothesis-generating reproductive benefit, together with drug-specific washout planning and strategies to minimize post-discontinuation rebound. Future trials should standardize reproductive endpoints and systematically capture periconception exposure to enable confirmatory synthesis and individualized benefit-risk estimation.