Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31024636›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2016

A statement on the developmental immunotoxicity of bisphenol A (BPA): answer to the question from the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport.

Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF), Vittorio Silano, Claudia Bolognesi, Laurence Castle, Jean-Pierre Cravedi, Karl-Heinz Engel, Paul Fowler, Roland Franz, Konrad Grob, Rainer Gürtler and 15 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. BPA and Nutraceuticals, Simultaneous Effects on Endocrine Functions.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2019
    Review
  8. Neuro-toxic and Reproductive Effects of BPA.Current neuropharmacology · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes, Flavourings and Processing Aids (CEF)
Vittorio Silano
Claudia Bolognesi
Laurence Castle
Jean-Pierre Cravedi
Karl-Heinz Engel
Paul Fowler
Roland Franz
Konrad Grob
Rainer Gürtler
Sirpa Kärenlampi
Wim Mennes
Maria Rosaria Milana
André Penninks
Andrew Smith
Maria de Fátima Tavares Poças
Christina Tlustos
Detlef Wölfle
Holger Zorn
Corina-Aurelia Zugravu
Stacey Anderson
Dori Germolec
Raymond Pieters
Anna F Castoldi
Trine Husøy
Ministry of Health Welfare and Sport · NL

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This statement addresses a request to EFSA from the Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport to assess the impact of recent evidence underlying the conclusions of the 2016 RIVM report on the current temporary tolerable intake (t-TDI) for BPA of 4 μg/kg bw/day set by EFSA in 2015. The CEF Panel has then evaluated the results of two studies published by Ménard et al. in 2014, suggesting food intolerance and impaired immune response to parasitic infection in rats exposed perinatally to BPA doses in the microgram/kg bw/day range. The same appraisal criteria and weight-of-evidence analysis used for the 2015 EFSA opinion on BPA were applied to these studies. This new evidence adds to the indications of immunotoxicity of BPA in animals reported in previous reviews. For the only endpoint for which three BPA doses were tested (IgG levels), a benchmark dose analysis of the dose-response data was carried out. Due to the high inter-animal variability within the treatment groups resulting in high confidence intervals and limited dose-response, the CEF Panel concluded that these data on anti-OVA IgG antibodies are not suitable to derive a reference point for BPA on immunotoxicity. Furthermore, the limitations of both Menard et al. studies observed by the Panel confound the interpretation of the study results and prevent the assessment of the relevance to human health. The CEF Panel overall considers that the results from the two Menard et al. studies are not sufficient to call for a revision of the EFSA t-TDI for BPA. EFSA will start a review of all the scientific evidence published after 2012 and relevant for BPA hazard assessment (including immunotoxicity) in 2017. The results of immunological studies such as the two evaluated here would form a useful contribution to this evaluation provided that the limitations identified herein were addressed.

Indexed as

Bisphenol Aimmune systemin vivoperinatal

Identifiers

PMID31024636
PMCPMC6477692
OpenAlexW2538044015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.