Revisiting the testicular toxicity of cyanide: Assessment of the new and existing literature

2Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Based on new testing, we re-assess U.S. EPA and California OEHHA conclusions regarding male reproductive toxicity associated with cyanide exposure. Methods: Literature identified by ATSDR, ECETOC and EPA was complemented by studies conducted after 2006. Relevant studies were scored for quality using ToxRTool. Results: Eleven pertinent animal investigations were identified; five with quality scores of 1 were evaluated in-depth. The NTP 13-week drinking water study of NaCN in rats reported significantly decreased water intakes and reduced cauda epididymal weights; altered sperm parameters occurred in high-dose rats. When compared to contemporaneous historical control data (HCD), the mean cauda epididymal weights of cyanide-treated rats in the NTP study were within HCD, whereas control weights exceeded HCD. A new 13-week drinking water study used the same design with additional features (individually caged rats, “paired water” controls, thyroid hormone determinations, post-treatment recovery) and found a smaller decrease in water consumption (11% versus 18% at 300 ppm) and no treatment-related changes in male reproductive measures. Although thyroid/parathyroid weights were increased at 300 ppm, histopathology and thyroid hormone levels were unaffected. The remaining high-quality cyanide studies reported no adverse findings in male reproductive organs. Unconfounded sperm measures were not adversely affected in any quality 1 studies. Conclusions: Changes in the male reproductive system reported after cyanide exposure in the NTP study were not reproducible, unlikely to be treatment-related, and should not be used as the sole basis for human health assessments.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Williams, A. L., & DeSesso, J. M. (2023). Revisiting the testicular toxicity of cyanide: Assessment of the new and existing literature. Birth Defects Research, 115(7), 687–709. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdr2.2160

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free