Evaluation of developmental toxicity of chlorpyrifos through new approach methodologies: a systematic review
Coppola L., Lori G., Tait S., Sogorb MA., Estevan C.
Systematic Review, published in Arch Toxicol (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Systematic Review
- Journal
- Arch Toxicol (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 39869190
- PMCID
- PMC11821739
- DOI
- 10.1007/s00204-024-03945-6
- Citations
- 9
Abstract (original English)
Chlorpyrifos (CPF) is an organophosphorus pesticide of concern because many in vivo animal studies have demonstrated developmental toxicity exerted by this substance; however, despite its widespread use, evidence from epidemiological studies is still limited. In this study, we have collected all the information generated in the twenty-first century on the developmental toxicity of CPF using new approach methodologies. We have critically evaluated and integrated information coming from 70 papers considering human, rodent, avian and fish models. The comparison of the collected evidence with available adverse outcome pathways allows us to conclude that adverse outcomes observed in animals, such as memory and learning impairments as well as reduction in cognitive function, could involve several mechanisms of action including inhibition of acetylcholinesterase, overactivation of glutamate receptors and activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2, followed by both disruption of neurotransmitter release and increase in oxidative stress and apoptosis.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.