ArticleToxics2024
A Comparison of In Vitro Points of Departure with Human Blood Levels for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS).
Article in Toxics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Evidence Map for the Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Universe.Environmental health perspectives · 2026Review
- Probabilistic Concentration-Response Modeling and Risk Prioritization of Defined Mixtures of PFAS Using HumanEnvironmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): persistence, toxicity, and emerging solutions.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2026Review
- Transcriptomic dose response assessment of PFAS chemicals 3:3 fluorotelomer carboxylic acid, 7:3 fluorotelomer alcohol, and perfluorohexanesulfonamide.Toxicology · 2025Article
- Systematic Evidence Map for the Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Universe.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Review
- Incorporating new approach methods (NAMs) data in dose-response assessments: The future is now!Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are widely used, and their fluorinated state contributes to unique uses and stability but also long half-lives in the environment and humans. PFAS have been shown to be toxic, leading to immunosuppression, cancer, and other adverse health outcomes. Only a small fraction of the PFAS in commerce have been evaluated for toxicity using in vivo tests, which leads to a need to prioritize which compounds to examine further. Here, we demonstrate a prioritization approach that combines human biomonitoring data (blood concentrations) with bioactivity data (concentrations at which bioactivity is observed in vitro) for 31 PFAS. The in vitro data are taken from a battery of cell-based assays, mostly run on human cells. The result is a Bioactive Concentration to Blood Concentration Ratio (BCBCR), similar to a margin of exposure (MoE). Chemicals with low BCBCR values could then be prioritized for further risk assessment. Using this method, two of the PFAS, PFOA (Perfluorooctanoic Acid) and PFOS (Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid), have BCBCR values < 1 for some populations. An additional 9 PFAS have BCBCR values < 100 for some populations. This study shows a promising approach to screening level risk assessments of compounds such as PFAS that are long-lived in humans and other species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.