To the extent possible under law, AOP-Wiki has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to KE:227

Event: 227

Key Event Title

The KE title should describe a discrete biological change that can be measured. It should generally define the biological object or process being measured and whether it is increased, decreased, or otherwise definably altered relative to a control state. For example “enzyme activity, decreased”, “hormone concentration, increased”, or “growth rate, decreased”, where the specific enzyme or hormone being measured is defined. More help

Activation, PPARα

Short name
The KE short name should be a reasonable abbreviation of the KE title and is used in labelling this object throughout the AOP-Wiki. The short name should be less than 80 characters in length. More help
Activation, PPARα

Biological Context

Structured terms, selected from a drop-down menu, are used to identify the level of biological organization for each KE. Note, KEs should be defined within a particular level of biological organization. Only KERs should be used to transition from one level of organization to another. Selection of the level of biological organization defines which structured terms will be available to select when defining the Event Components (below). More help
Level of Biological Organization
Molecular

Cell term

Further information on Event Components and Biological Context may be viewed on the attached pdf.The biological context describes the location/biological environment in which the event takes place.  For molecular/cellular events this would include the cellular context (if known), organ context, and species/life stage/sex for which the event is relevant. For tissue/organ events cellular context is not applicable.  For individual/population events, the organ context is not applicable. More help
Cell term
eukaryotic cell

Organ term

Further information on Event Components and Biological Context may be viewed on the attached pdf.The biological context describes the location/biological environment in which the event takes place.  For molecular/cellular events this would include the cellular context (if known), organ context, and species/life stage/sex for which the event is relevant. For tissue/organ events cellular context is not applicable.  For individual/population events, the organ context is not applicable. More help
Organ term
liver

Key Event Components

Further information on Event Components and Biological Context may be viewed on the attached pdf.Because one of the aims of the AOP-KB is to facilitate de facto construction of AOP networks through the use of shared KE and KER elements, authors are also asked to define their KEs using a set of structured ontology terms (Event Components). In the absence of structured terms, the same KE can readily be defined using a number of synonymous titles (read by a computer as character strings). In order to make these synonymous KEs more machine-readable, KEs should also be defined by one or more “event components” consisting of a biological process, object, and action with each term originating from one of 22 biological ontologies (Ives, et al., 2017; See List). Biological process describes dynamics of the underlying biological system (e.g., receptor signalling). The biological object is the subject of the perturbation (e.g., a specific biological receptor that is activated or inhibited). Action represents the direction of perturbation of this system (generally increased or decreased; e.g., ‘decreased’ in the case of a receptor that is inhibited to indicate a decrease in the signalling by that receptor).Note that when editing Event Components, clicking an existing Event Component from the Suggestions menu will autopopulate these fields, along with their source ID and description. To clear any fields before submitting the event component, use the 'Clear process,' 'Clear object,' or 'Clear action' buttons. If a desired term does not exist, a new term request may be made via Term Requests. Event components may not be edited; to edit an event component, remove the existing event component and create a new one using the terms that you wish to add. More help
Process Object Action
peroxisome proliferator activated receptor signaling pathway peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha increased

Key Event Overview

AOPs Including This Key Event

All of the AOPs that are linked to this KE will automatically be listed in this subsection. This table can be particularly useful for derivation of AOP networks including the KE. Clicking on the name of the AOP will bring you to the individual page for that AOP. More help
AOP Name Role of event in AOP Point of Contact Author Status OECD Status
PPARα activation leading to impaired fertility MolecularInitiatingEvent Elise Grignard (send email) Open for citation & comment EAGMST Under Review
PPAR and reproductive toxicity MolecularInitiatingEvent Elise Grignard (send email) Not under active development Under Development
NRF2/FXR to steatosis KeyEvent Michelle Angrish (send email) Under Development: Contributions and Comments Welcome
PPARalpha-dependent liver tumors in rodents MolecularInitiatingEvent Chris Corton (send email) Under development: Not open for comment. Do not cite Under Development
PPARa Agonism Impairs Fish Reproduction MolecularInitiatingEvent Ashley Kittelson (send email) Under development: Not open for comment. Do not cite

Stressors

This is a structured field used to identify specific agents (generally chemicals) that can trigger the KE. Stressors identified in this field will be linked to the KE in a machine-readable manner, such that, for example, a stressor search would identify this as an event the stressor can trigger. NOTE: intermediate or downstream KEs in one AOP may function as MIEs in other AOPs, meaning that stressor information may be added to the KE description, even if it is a downstream KE in the pathway currently under development.Information concerning the stressors that may trigger an MIE can be defined using a combination of structured and unstructured (free-text) fields. For example, structured fields may be used to indicate specific chemicals for which there is evidence of an interaction relevant to this MIE. By linking the KE description to a structured chemical name, it will be increasingly possible to link the MIE to other sources of chemical data and information, enhancing searchability and inter-operability among different data-sources and knowledgebases. The free-text section “Evidence for perturbation of this MIE by stressor” can be used both to identify the supporting evidence for specific stressors triggering the MIE as well as to define broad chemical categories or other properties that classify the stressors able to trigger the MIE for which specific structured terms may not exist. More help

Taxonomic Applicability

Latin or common names of a species or broader taxonomic grouping (e.g., class, order, family) can be selected from an ontology. In many cases, individual species identified in these structured fields will be those for which the strongest evidence used in constructing the AOP was available in relation to this KE. More help
Term Scientific Term Evidence Link
rat Rattus norvegicus High NCBI
mouse Mus musculus High NCBI
human Homo sapiens High NCBI

Life Stages

The structured ontology terms for life-stage are more comprehensive than those for taxa, but may still require further description/development and explanation in the free text section. More help

Sex Applicability

The authors must select from one of the following: Male, female, mixed, asexual, third gender, hermaphrodite, or unspecific. More help

Key Event Description

A description of the biological state being observed or measured, the biological compartment in which it is measured, and its general role in the biology should be provided. For example, the biological state being measured could be the activity of an enzyme, the expression of a gene or abundance of an mRNA transcript, the concentration of a hormone or protein, neuronal activity, heart rate, etc. The biological compartment may be a particular cell type, tissue, organ, fluid (e.g., plasma, cerebrospinal fluid), etc. The role in the biology could describe the reaction that an enzyme catalyses and the role of that reaction within a given metabolic pathway; the protein that a gene or mRNA transcript codes for and the function of that protein; the function of a hormone in a given target tissue, physiological function of an organ, etc. Careful attention should be taken to avoid reference to other KEs, KERs or AOPs. Only describe this KE as a single isolated measurable event/state. This will ensure that the KE is modular and can be used by other AOPs, thereby facilitating construction of AOP networks. More help

Gene expression occurs in a coordinated fashion (Judson et al., 2012). The many observations of altered gene expression following binding of ligand to PPARα led to systematic investigations of the genomic signature that corresponds to PPARα activation (Tamura et al., 2006; Kupershmidt et al., 2010; Rosen et al., 2017; Rooney et al., 2018; Corton et al., 2020; Hill et al., 2020; Lewis et al., 2020). Specific gene with increased expression following PPARα activation include Cyp4a1, Cpt1B, and Lpl. More generally, the pathways activated include:

  • Genes involved in Metabolism of lipids and lipoproteins
  • Fatty acid metabolism
  • Genes involved in Fatty acid, triacylglycerol, and ketone body metabolism
  • PPAR signaling pathway
  • Peroxisome
  • Genes involved in Cell Cycle

Biological state

The Peroxisome Proliferator Activated receptor α (PPARα) belongs to the Peroxisome Proliferator Activated receptors (PPARs; NR1C) steroid/thyroid/retinoid receptor superfamily of transcription factors.

Biological compartments

PPARα is expressed in high levels in tissues that perform significant catabolism of fatty acids (FAs), such as brown adipose tissue, liver, heart, kidney, and intestine (Michalik et al. 2006). The receptor is present also in skeletal muscle, intestine, pancreas, lung, placenta and testes (Mukherjee et al. 1997), (Schultz et al. 1999).

General role in biology

PPARs are activated by fatty acids and their derivatives; they are sensors of dietary lipids and are involved in lipid and carbohydrate metabolism, immune response and peroxisome proliferation (Wahli and Desvergne 1999), (Evans, Barish, & Wang, 2004). PAPRα is a also a target of hypothalamic hormone signalling and was found to play a role in embryonic development (Yessoufou and Wahli 2010).

Fibrates, activators of PPARα, are commonly used to treat hypertriglyceridemia and other dyslipidemic states as they have been shown to decrease circulating lipid levels (Lefebvre et al. 2006).

How It Is Measured or Detected

One of the primary considerations in evaluating AOPs is the relevance and reliability of the methods with which the KEs can be measured. The aim of this section of the KE description is not to provide detailed protocols, but rather to capture, in a sentence or two, per method, the type(s) of measurements that can be employed to evaluate the KE and the relative level of scientific confidence in those measurements. Methods that can be used to detect or measure the biological state represented in the KE should be briefly described and/or cited. These can range from citation of specific validated test guidelines, citation of specific methods published in the peer reviewed literature, or outlines of a general protocol or approach (e.g., a protein may be measured by ELISA).Key considerations regarding scientific confidence in the measurement approach include whether the assay is fit for purpose, whether it provides a direct or indirect measure of the biological state in question, whether it is repeatable and reproducible, and the extent to which it is accepted in the scientific and/or regulatory community. Information can be obtained from the OECD Test Guidelines website and the EURL ECVAM Database Service on Alternative Methods to Animal Experimentation (DB-ALM). ?

Binding of ligands to PPARα is measured using binding assays in vitro and in silico, whereas the information about functional activation is derived from transactivation assays (e.g. transactivation assay with reporter gene) that demonstrate functional activation of a nuclear receptor by a specific compound. Binding of agonists within the ligand-binding site of PPARs causes a conformational change of nuclear receptor that promotes binding to transcriptional co-activators. Conversely, binding of antagonists results in a conformation that favours the binding of co-repressors (Yu and Reddy 2007), (Viswakarma et al. 2010). Transactivation assays are performed using transient or stably transfected cells with the PPARα expression plasmid and a reporter plasmid, respectively. There are also other methods that have been used to measure PPARα activity, such as the Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) or commercially available PPARα transcription factor assay kits, see Table 1. The transactivation (stable transfection) assay provides the most applicable OECD Level 2 assay (i.e. In vitro assays providing mechanistic data) aimed at identifying the initiating event leading to an adverse outcome (LeBlanc, Norris, and Kloas 2011). A recent study characterized the PPARα ligand binding domain for the purpose of next-generation metabolic disease drugs (Kamata et al. 2020).

The most direct measure of this MIE is microarray profiling from large gene expression databases TG-GATEs and DrugMatrix coupled with t statistical analysis of whole genome expression profiles (Svoboda et al., 2019; Igarashi et al., 2015) From these data, A gene expression signature of 131 PPARα-dependent genes was built using microarray profiles from the livers of wild-type and PPARα-null mice. A quantitative measure of this expression signature is a measure of similarity/correlation between the PPARα signature and positive and negative test sets is provided by the Running Fisher test (Corton et al., 2020; Hill et al., 2020; Kupershmidt et al., 2010; Lewis et al., 2020; Rooney et al., 2018).

A gene expression signature of 131 PPARα-dependent genes was built using microarray profiles from the livers of wild-type and PPARα-null mice. A quantitative measure of this expression signature would be a measure of similarity/correlation between the PPARα signature and positive and negative test sets is provided by the Running Fisher test (Kupershmidt et al., 2010; Rooney et al., 2018; Corton et al., 2020).

For all substances, MIE activation does not rise monotonically over dose or time. These fluctuations are likely due to variations in cofactor availability or access to the site of transcription (Gaillard et al., 2006; Koppen et al., 2009; Kupershmidt et al., 2010; Ong et al., 2010; Chow et al., 2011; De Vos et al., 2011; Simon et al., 2015).

.

Measurements of PPARα Activation
Method/Test Test Principle Test Environment Test Outcome Assay Type/Domain

molecular modelling; docking simulation

Computational simulation of  ligand binding  In silico Prediction off binding interaction  Quantitative virtual screeings
Scintillation proximity binding assay Direct binding of ligand In vitro Identifies compouds that bind to PPARα Qualitative in vitro screening
PPARα reporter gene assay Quantify changes in in PPARα activation via a sensitive surrogate  In vitro, Ex vivo Measures changes in activity of genes linked to a PPARα receptor element Quantitative in vitro screening
Electrophoretic Band Shift determines if a protein or protein mixture will bind to a specific DNA or RNA sequence In vitro Measures cofactor binding by changes in gel mobility Quantitative in vitro screening
Microarray profiling Develop MIE-specific sets of gene expression biomarkers In vivo Classification of PPARα biomarker genes with statistical methods Quantitative in vivo screening

Domain of Applicability

This free text section should be used to elaborate on the scientific basis for the indicated domains of applicability and the WoE calls (if provided). While structured terms may be selected to define the taxonomic, life stage and sex applicability (see structured applicability terms, above) of the KE, the structured terms may not adequately reflect or capture the overall biological applicability domain (particularly with regard to taxa). Likewise, the structured terms do not provide an explanation or rationale for the selection. The free-text section on evidence for taxonomic, life stage, and sex applicability can be used to elaborate on why the specific structured terms were selected, and provide supporting references and background information.  More help

PPARα has been identified in frog (Xenopus laevis), mouse, human, rat, fish, hamster and chicken (reviewed in (Wahli and Desvergne 1999)).

Evidence for Perturbation by Stressor

Overview for Molecular Initiating Event

When a specific MIE can be defined (i.e., the molecular target and nature of interaction is known), in addition to describing the biological state associated with the MIE, how it can be measured, and its taxonomic, life stage, and sex applicability, it is useful to list stressors known to trigger the MIE and provide evidence supporting that initiation. This will often be a list of prototypical compounds demonstrated to interact with the target molecule in the manner detailed in the MIE description to initiate a given pathway (e.g., 2,3,7,8-TCDD as a prototypical AhR agonist; 17α-ethynyl estradiol as a prototypical ER agonist). Depending on the information available, this could also refer to chemical categories (i.e., groups of chemicals with defined structural features known to trigger the MIE). Known stressors should be included in the MIE description, but it is not expected to include a comprehensive list. Rather initially, stressors identified will be exemplary and the stressor list will be expanded over time. For more information on MIE, please see pages 32-33 in the User Handbook.

Fibrates are ligands of PPARα (Staels et al. 1998).

Phthalates

MHEP (CAS 4376-20-9) directly binds in vitro to PPARα (Lapinskas et al. 2005) and activates this receptor in transactivation assays PPARα (Lapinskas et al. 2005), (Maloney and Waxman 1999), (Hurst and Waxman 2003), (Bility et al. 2004), (Lampen, Zimnik, and Nau 2003), (Venkata et al. 2006) ]. DEHP (CAS 117-81-7) has not been found to bind and activate PPARα (Lapinskas et al. 2005), (Maloney and Waxman 1999). However, the recent studies shown activation of PPARα (ToxCastTM Data).

Notably, PPARα are responsive to DEHP in vitro as they are translocated to the nucleus (in primary Sertoli cells) (Dufour et al. 2003), (Bhattacharya et al. 2005). Expression of PPARα [mRNA and protein] has been reported to be also modulated by phthtalates: (to be up-regulated in vivo upon DEHP treatment (Xu et al. 2010) and down-regulated by Diisobutyl phthalate (DiBP) (Boberg et al. 2008)).

Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) is known to activate PPARα (Vanden Heuvel et al. 2006).

Organotin

Tributyltin (TBT) activates all three heterodimers of PPAR with RXR, primarily through its interaction with RXR (le Maire et al. 2009)

References

List of the literature that was cited for this KE description. Ideally, the list of references, should conform, to the extent possible, with the OECD Style Guide (https://www.oecd.org/about/publishing/OECD-Style-Guide-Third-Edition.pdf) (OECD, 2015). More help

Bhattacharya, Nandini, Jannette M Dufour, My-Nuong Vo, Janice Okita, Richard Okita, and Kwan Hee Kim. 2005. “Differential Effects of Phthalates on the Testis and the Liver.” Biology of Reproduction 72 (3) (March): 745–54. doi:10.1095/biolreprod.104.031583.

Bility, Moses T, Jerry T Thompson, Richard H McKee, Raymond M David, John H Butala, John P Vanden Heuvel, and Jeffrey M Peters. 2004. “Activation of Mouse and Human Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors (PPARs) by Phthalate Monoesters.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 82 (1) (November): 170–82. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfh253.

Chow, C. C., Ong, K. M., Dougherty, E. J., & Simons, S. S. (2011). Inferring mechanisms from dose-response curves. Methods Enzymol, 487, 465-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-381270-4.00016-0

Corton, J. C., Hill, T., Sutherland, J. J., Stevens, J. L., & Rooney, J. (2020). A Set of Six Gene Expression Biomarkers Identify Rat Liver Tumorigens in Short-Term Assays. Toxicol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfaa101

De Vos, D., Bruggeman, F. J., Westerhoff, H. V., & Bakker, B. M. (2011). How molecular competition influences fluxes in gene expression networks. PLoS One, 6(12), e28494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028494

Dufour, Jannette M, My-Nuong Vo, Nandini Bhattacharya, Janice Okita, Richard Okita, and Kwan Hee Kim. 2003. “Peroxisome Proliferators Disrupt Retinoic Acid Receptor Alpha Signaling in the Testis.” Biology of Reproduction 68 (4) (April): 1215–24. doi:10.1095/biolreprod.102.010488.

Feige, Jérôme N, Laurent Gelman, Daniel Rossi, Vincent Zoete, Raphaël Métivier, Cicerone Tudor, Silvia I Anghel, et al. 2007. “The Endocrine Disruptor Monoethyl-Hexyl-Phthalate Is a Selective Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Gamma Modulator That Promotes Adipogenesis.” The Journal of Biological Chemistry 282 (26) (June 29): 19152–66. doi:10.1074/jbc.M702724200.

Gaillard, S., Grasfeder, L. L., Haeffele, C. L., Lobenhofer, E. K., Chu, T.-M., Wolfinger, R., Kazmin, D., Koves, T. R., Muoio, D. M., Chang, C.-y., & McDonnell, D. P. (2006). Receptor-selective coactivators as tools to define the biology of specific receptor-coactivator pairs. Mol Cell, 24(5), 797-803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2006.10.012

Hill, T., Rooney, J., Abedini, J., El-Masri, H., Wood, C. E., & Corton, J. C. (2020). Gene Expression Thresholds Derived From Short-Term Exposures Identify Rat Liver Tumorigens. Toxicol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfaa102

Hurst, Christopher H, and David J Waxman. 2003. “Activation of PPARalpha and PPARgamma by Environmental Phthalate Monoesters.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 74 (2) (August): 297–308. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfg145.

Igarashi, Y., Nakatsu, N., Yamashita, T., Ono, A., Ohno, Y., Urushidani, T., & Yamada, H. (2015). Open TG-GATEs: a large-scale toxicogenomics database. Nucleic Acids Res, 43(Database issue), D921-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku955

Kamata S, Oyama T, Saito K, Honda A, Yamamoto Y, Suda K, Ishikawa R, Itoh T, Watanabe Y, Shibata T, Uchida K, Suematsu M, Ishii I. PPARα Ligand-Binding Domain Structures with Endogenous Fatty Acids and Fibrates. iScience. 2020;23(11):101727. 10.1016/j.isci.2020.101727

Kaya, Taner, Scott C Mohr, David J Waxman, and Sandor Vajda. 2006. “Computational Screening of Phthalate Monoesters for Binding to PPARgamma.” Chemical Research in Toxicology 19 (8) (August): 999–1009. doi:10.1021/tx050301s.

Koppen, A., Houtman, R., Pijnenburg, D., Jeninga, E. H., Ruijtenbeek, R., & Kalkhoven, E. (2009). Nuclear receptor-coregulator interaction profiling identifies TRIP3 as a novel peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma cofactor. Mol Cell Proteomics, 8(10), 2212-2226. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M900209-MCP200

Kupershmidt, I., Su, Q. J., Grewal, A., Sundaresh, S., Halperin, I., Flynn, J., Shekar, M., Wang, H., Park, J., Cui, W., Wall, G. D., Wisotzkey, R., Alag, S., Akhtari, S., & Ronaghi, M. (2010). Ontology-based meta-analysis of global collections of high-throughput public data. PLoS One, 5(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013066

Lampen, Alfonso, Susan Zimnik, and Heinz Nau. 2003. “Teratogenic Phthalate Esters and Metabolites Activate the Nuclear Receptors PPARs and Induce Differentiation of F9 Cells.” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 188 (1) (April): 14–23. doi:10.1016/S0041-008X(03)00014-0.

Lapinskas, Paula J., Sherri Brown, Lisa M. Leesnitzer, Steven Blanchard, Cyndi Swanson, Russell C. Cattley, and J. Christopher Corton. 2005. “Role of PPARα in Mediating the Effects of Phthalates and Metabolites in the Liver.” Toxicology 207 (1): 149–163.

Le Maire, Albane, Marina Grimaldi, Dominique Roecklin, Sonia Dagnino, Valérie Vivat-Hannah, Patrick Balaguer, and William Bourguet. 2009. “Activation of RXR-PPAR Heterodimers by Organotin Environmental Endocrine Disruptors.” EMBO Reports 10 (4) (April): 367–73. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.8.

LeBlanc, GA, DO Norris, and W Kloas. 2011. “Detailed Review Paper State of the Science on Novel In Vitro and In Vivo Screening and Testing Methods and Endpoints for Evaluating Endocrine Disruptors” (178).

Lefebvre, Philippe, Giulia Chinetti, Jean-Charles Fruchart, and Bart Staels. 2006. “Sorting out the Roles of PPAR Alpha in Energy Metabolism and Vascular Homeostasis.” The Journal of Clinical Investigation 116 (3) (March): 571–80. doi:10.1172/JCI27989.

Lewis, R. W., Hill, T., & Corton, J. C. (2020). A set of six Gene expression biomarkers and their thresholds identify rat liver tumorigens in short-term assays. Toxicology, 443, 152547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2020.152547

Maloney, Erin K., and David J. Waxman. 1999. “Trans-Activation of PPARα and PPARγ by Structurally Diverse Environmental Chemicals.” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 161 (2): 209–218.

Michalik, Liliane, Johan Auwerx, Joel P Berger, V Krishna Chatterjee, Christopher K Glass, Frank J Gonzalez, Paul A Grimaldi, et al. 2006. “International Union of Pharmacology. LXI. Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors.” Pharmacological Reviews 58 (4) (December): 726–41. doi:10.1124/pr.58.4.5.

Mukherjee, R, L Jow, G E Croston, and J R Paterniti. 1997. “Identification, Characterization, and Tissue Distribution of Human Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor (PPAR) Isoforms PPARgamma2 versus PPARgamma1 and Activation with Retinoid X Receptor Agonists and Antagonists.” The Journal of Biological Chemistry 272 (12) (March 21): 8071–6.

Ong, K. M., Blackford, J. A., Kagan, B. L., Simons, S. S., & Chow, C. C. (2010). A theoretical framework for gene induction and experimental comparisons. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 107(15), 7107-7112. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0911095107

Rooney, J., Hill, T., Qin, C., Sistare, F. D., & Corton, J. C. (2018). Adverse outcome pathway-driven identification of rat liver tumorigens in short-term assays. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 356, 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2018.07.023

Schultz, R, W Yan, J Toppari, A Völkl, J A Gustafsson, and M Pelto-Huikko. 1999. “Expression of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Alpha Messenger Ribonucleic Acid and Protein in Human and Rat Testis.” Endocrinology 140 (7) (July): 2968–75. doi:10.1210/endo.140.7.6858.

Simon, T. W., Budinsky, R. A., & Rowlands, J. C. (2015). A model for aryl hydrocarbon receptor-activated gene expression shows potency and efficacy changes and predicts squelching due to competition for transcription co-activators. PLoS One, 10(6), e0127952. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127952.

Staels, B., J. Dallongeville, J. Auwerx, K. Schoonjans, E. Leitersdorf, and J.-C. Fruchart. 1998. “Mechanism of Action of Fibrates on Lipid and Lipoprotein Metabolism.” Circulation 98 (19) (November 10): 2088–2093. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.98.19.2088.

Svoboda, D. L., Saddler, T., & Auerbach, S. S. (2019). An Overview of National Toxicology Program’s Toxicogenomic Applications: DrugMatrix and ToxFX.  In Advances in Computational Toxicology (pp. 141-157). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-16443-0_8

ToxCastTM Data. “ToxCastTM Data.” US Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/ncct/toxcast/data.html

Vanden Heuvel, John P, Jerry T Thompson, Steven R Frame, and Peter J Gillies. 2006. “Differential Activation of Nuclear Receptors by Perfluorinated Fatty Acid Analogs and Natural Fatty Acids: A Comparison of Human, Mouse, and Rat Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-Alpha, -Beta, and -Gamma, Liver X Receptor-Beta, and Retinoid X Rec.” Toxicological Sciences : An Official Journal of the Society of Toxicology 92 (2) (August): 476–89. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfl014.

Venkata, Nagaraj Gopisetty, Jodie a Robinson, Peter J Cabot, Barbara Davis, Greg R Monteith, and Sarah J Roberts-Thomson. 2006. “Mono(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate and Mono-N-Butyl Phthalate Activation of Peroxisome Proliferator Activated-Receptors Alpha and Gamma in Breast.” Toxicology Letters 163 (3) (June 1): 224–34. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2005.11.001.

Viswakarma, Navin, Yuzhi Jia, Liang Bai, Aurore Vluggens, Jayme Borensztajn, Jianming Xu, and Janardan K Reddy. 2010. “Coactivators in PPAR-Regulated Gene Expression.” PPAR Research 2010 (January). doi:10.1155/2010/250126.

Wahli, Walter, and B Desvergne. 1999. “Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors: Nuclear Control of Metabolism.” Endocrine Reviews 20 (5) (October): 649–88. Wu, Bin, Jie Gao, and Ming-wei Wang. 2005. “Development of a Complex Scintillation Proximity Assay for High-Throughput Screening of PPARgamma Modulators.” Acta Pharmacologica Sinica 26 (3) (March): 339–44. doi:10.1111/j.1745-7254.2005.00040.x.

Xu, Chuan, Ji-An Chen, Zhiqun Qiu, Qing Zhao, Jiaohua Luo, Lan Yang, Hui Zeng, et al. 2010. “Ovotoxicity and PPAR-Mediated Aromatase Downregulation in Female Sprague-Dawley Rats Following Combined Oral Exposure to Benzo[a]pyrene and Di-(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate.” Toxicology Letters 199 (3) (December 15): 323–32. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2010.09.015.

Yessoufou, a, and W Wahli. 2010. “Multifaceted Roles of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors (PPARs) at the Cellular and Whole Organism Levels.” Swiss Medical Weekly 140 (September) (January): w13071. doi:10.4414/smw.2010.13071.

Yu, Songtao, and Janardan K Reddy. 2007. “Transcription Coactivators for Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors.” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1771 (8) (August): 936–51. doi:10.1016/j.bbalip.2007.01.008.