MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417494445 · doi:10.7759/cureus.99603

Nephrotoxic Effects of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals: A Systematic Review

2025· article· en· W4417494445 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anas E Ahmed, Manal H Madkhali, Hashim A Alhashim, Laura M Damanhouri, Ayman M Bagasher, Abdulmajeed Alharbi, Ayman F Almohammadi, Nadia A Alomrani, Abdulkarim M Alghaithi, Nouf H Hibili

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseBenzhydryl compoundsPopulationSystematic reviewNephrotoxicityCohortCochrane LibraryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are widespread environmental pollutants that interfere with hormonal regulation and are increasingly linked to kidney dysfunction. The kidney's central role in xenobiotic filtration and excretion makes it vulnerable to cumulative toxic exposures that trigger oxidative stress, inflammation, and apoptosis, leading to chronic kidney disease (CKD) and related disorders. This systematic review synthesized evidence from human, animal, and computational studies assessing exposure to multiple EDC classes, including bisphenols, phthalates, parabens, alkylphenols, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), pesticides, and heavy metals, and their associations with kidney outcomes. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted up to October 2025 following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Methodological quality was evaluated using the AXIS tool for cross-sectional studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort and case-control studies, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists, and the Toxicological Data Reliability Assessment Tool (ToxRTool). Of 42,006 records screened, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing large population cohorts, animal experiments, and molecular docking analyses. Cross-sectional datasets, such as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), demonstrated significant associations between VOCs, phthalates, and heavy metals (particularly lead and cadmium) and increased CKD and diabetic kidney disease (DKD) risk, while some PFASs showed neutral or inverse associations. Experimental evidence confirmed that bisphenol and alkylphenol derivatives induce renal injury via oxidative stress, p53 activation, and apoptosis, and dialysis-related studies revealed iatrogenic bisphenol contamination. Overall, these findings highlight the kidney's susceptibility to environmental toxicants and emphasize the need for stricter regulation of EDC-containing materials, improved biomonitoring of cumulative exposures, and further mechanistic research to clarify dose-response relationships and long-term renal effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.009
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals→French-language works237,207→