Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37089179›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2023

Re-evaluation of the risks to public health related to the presence of bisphenol A (BPA) in foodstuffs.

EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP), Claude Lambré, José Manuel Barat Baviera, Claudia Bolognesi, Andrew Chesson, Pier Sandro Cocconcelli, Riccardo Crebelli, David Michael Gott, Konrad Grob, Evgenia Lampi and 27 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 202 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
202citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
51.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

202 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 363 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

142 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

37 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP)
Claude Lambré
José Manuel Barat Baviera
Claudia Bolognesi
Andrew Chesson
Pier Sandro Cocconcelli
Riccardo Crebelli
David Michael Gott
Konrad Grob
Evgenia Lampi
Marcel Mengelers
Alicja Mortensen
Gilles Rivière
Vittorio Silano Until December
Inger-Lise Steffensen
Christina Tlustos
Laurence Vernis
Holger Zorn
Monika Batke
Margherita Bignami
Emanuela Corsini
Rex FitzGerald
Ursula Gundert-Remy
Thorhallur Halldorsson
Andrew Hart
Evangelia Ntzani
Eugenio Scanziani
Henri Schroeder
Beate Ulbrich
Dina Waalkens-Berendsen
Detlef Woelfle
Zainab Al Harraq
Katleen Baert
Maria Carfì
Anna F Castoldi
Cristina Croera
Henk Van Loveren
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut Langevin · FRNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLUniversity of Basel · CHUniversity of Genoa · ITUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2015, EFSA established a temporary tolerable daily intake (t-TDI) for BPA of 4 μg/kg body weight (bw) per day. In 2016, the European Commission mandated EFSA to re-evaluate the risks to public health from the presence of BPA in foodstuffs and to establish a tolerable daily intake (TDI). For this re-evaluation, a pre-established protocol was used that had undergone public consultation. The CEP Panel concluded that it is Unlikely to Very Unlikely that BPA presents a genotoxic hazard through a direct mechanism. Taking into consideration the evidence from animal data and support from human observational studies, the immune system was identified as most sensitive to BPA exposure. An effect on Th17 cells in mice was identified as the critical effect; these cells are pivotal in cellular immune mechanisms and involved in the development of inflammatory conditions, including autoimmunity and lung inflammation. A reference point (RP) of 8.2 ng/kg bw per day, expressed as human equivalent dose, was identified for the critical effect. Uncertainty analysis assessed a probability of 57-73% that the lowest estimated Benchmark Dose (BMD) for other health effects was below the RP based on Th17 cells. In view of this, the CEP Panel judged that an additional uncertainty factor (UF) of 2 was needed for establishing the TDI. Applying an overall UF of 50 to the RP, a TDI of 0.2 ng BPA/kg bw per day was established. Comparison of this TDI with the dietary exposure estimates from the 2015 EFSA opinion showed that both the mean and the 95th percentile dietary exposures in all age groups exceeded the TDI by two to three orders of magnitude. Even considering the uncertainty in the exposure assessment, the exceedance being so large, the CEP Panel concluded that there is a health concern from dietary BPA exposure.

Indexed as

Bisphenol ABPAfood contact materialshazardhealth risksTDItoxicity

Identifiers

PMID37089179
PMCPMC10113887
OpenAlexW4366819469

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.