Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33385391›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental research2021

PFAS and cancer, a scoping review of the epidemiologic evidence.

Kyle Steenland, Andrea Winquist

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 162 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
162citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

162 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. AEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid acceleratesbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

102 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Kyle SteenlandRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Andrea WinquistNational Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS S 106-6, Atlanta, GA, 30341, USA. Electronic address: awinquist@cdc.gov.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of studies addressing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and cancer is increasing. Many communities have had water contaminated by PFAS, and cancer is one of the important community concerns related to PFAS exposure.

objectivesWe critically reviewed the evidence relating to PFAS and cancer from an epidemiologic standpoint to highlight directions for future research that would be the most likely to meaningfully increase knowledge.

methodsWe conducted a search in PubMed for studies of cancer and PFAS (through 9/20/2020). We identified epidemiologic studies that provided a quantitative estimate for some measure of the association between PFAS and cancer. Here, we review that literature, including several aspects of epidemiologic study design that impact the usefulness of study results.

resultsWe identified 16 cohort (or case-cohort) studies, 10 case-control studies (4 nested within cohorts and 6 non-nested), 1 cross sectional study and 1 ecologic study. The cancer sites with the most evidence of an association with PFAS are testicular and kidney cancer. There are also some suggestions in a few studies of an association with prostate cancer, but the data are inconsistent. DISCUSSION: Each study's design has strengths and limitations. Weaknesses in study design and methods can, in some cases, lead to questionable associations, but in other cases can make it more difficult to detect true associations, if they are present. Overall, the evidence for an association between cancer and PFAS remains sparse. A variety of studies with different strengths and weaknesses can be helpful to clarify associations between PFAS and cancer. Long term follow-up of large-sized cohorts with large exposure contrasts are most likely to be informative.

Indexed as

Alkanesulfonic AcidsEnvironmental PollutantsFluorocarbonsKidney NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMaleWaterAlkanesulfonic AcidsEnvironmental PollutantsFluorocarbonsWaterCancerPFASPFOAPFOSReview

Identifiers

PMID33385391
PMCPMC7946751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.