Per- and Poly-fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Exposure and Risk of Kidney, Liver, and Testicular Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are a large, complex group of synthetic chemicals humans can be exposed to from occupational or environmental sources. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we examined the association between PFAS exposure, particularly Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA), and Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid (PFOS), and risk of kidney, liver, and testicular cancer. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed to identify cohort and case-control studies reported after the Monograph of the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the Toxicological Profile of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. We assessed the quality of the studies by using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Forest relative risk (RR) plots were constructed for liver, kidney, and testicular cancer. We conducted stratified analyses by geographic region, study design, quality score, outcome, years of publication, exposure source, and PFAS type. A random-effects model was used to address heterogeneity between studies. RESULTS: Fifteen studies, including ten cohort studies, three case-control studies nested in a cohort, and two case-control studies were included after removing duplicate and irrelevant reports. We found an association between overall PFAS exposure and the risk of kidney cancers (RR=1.18, 95% CI =1.05-1.32; I =52.8%, 11 studies). Also, we showed an association between high-level exposure to PFAS and kidney cancer (RR=1.74, 95% CI =1.23-2.47; p=0.005) and testicular cancer (RR=2.22, 95% CI =1.12-4.39; p=0.057). There was no association with liver cancer. We found no heterogeneity by geographical region, PFAS type, study design, outcome, quality score, year of publication, or exposure source. Only two studies reported results among women. CONCLUSIONS: We detected an association between overall PFAS exposure and kidney cancer and high doses of PFAS with testicular cancer. However, bias and confounding cannot be excluded, precluding a conclusion in terms of causality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".