Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40206203›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science & technology letters2025

Filling the Gaps in PFAS Detection: Integrating GC-MS Non-Targeted Analysis for Comprehensive Environmental Monitoring and Exposure Assessment.

Seth R Newton, John A Bowden, Nathaniel Charest, Stephen R Jackson, Jeremy P Koelmel, Hannah K Liberatore, Ashley M Lin, Charles N Lowe, Sofia Nieto, Krystal J Godri Pollitt and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science & technology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. The impact of particle size on PFAS concentrations in dust from homes in North Carolina and New York and implications for exposure.Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

15 authors.

Seth R NewtonCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.
John A BowdenDepartment of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32608, USA.
Nathaniel CharestCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.
Stephen R JacksonCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.
Jeremy P KoelmelDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, 06510, USA.
Hannah K LiberatoreCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.
Ashley M LinDepartment of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32608, USA.
Charles N LoweCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.
Sofia NietoAgilent Technologies, Inc, Santa Clara, California, 95051, USA.
Krystal J Godri PollittDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, 06510, USA.
Anna R RobuckCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, Rhode Island, 02882, USA.
Pawel RostkowskiNILU, 2027, Kjeller, Norway.
Timothy G TownsendDepartment of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32608, USA.
M Ariel Geer WallaceCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.
Antony John WilliamsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have garnered increasing attention in recent years and non-targeted analysis (NTA) has become essential for elucidating novel PFAS structures. NTA and PFAS research have been dominated by liquid chromatography - mass spectrometry (LC-MS) with gas chromatography - mass spectrometry (GC-MS) used less often as evidenced by bibliometrics. However, the performance of GC-MS in NTA studies (GC-NTA) rivals that of LC-ESI-MS and GC-MS is shown to cover a complimentary chemical space. An LC-ESI-MS amenability model applied to a list of approximately 12,000 PFAS revealed that less than 10% of known PFAS chemistry is predicted to be amenable to typical LC-MS analysis. Therefore, there is strong potential for applying GC-MS methods to more fully assess the PFAS environmental contamination landscape, uniquely shedding light on both known and novel PFAS, especially within the chemical space realm of volatile and semi-volatile PFAS. Waste streams from fluorochemical manufacturing facilities have been heavily studied using LC-MS and targeted GC-MS; however, GC-NTA is needed to discover novel PFAS that are not amenable to LC-MS emitted from facilities. Studies on the incineration of PFAS-containing materials, such as aqueous film forming foam, have focused on the destruction of parent compounds and little is known about the transformation products formed during such processes. GC-NTA holds the potential to elucidate transformation products formed when PFAS are incinerated. Wastewater treatment plants and landfills are known sources of PFAS to the environment, yet GC-NTA is needed to understand air emissions of PFAS and PFAS transformation products from these sources. Consumer products are known to lead to indoor exposures to PFAS via emissions to air and dust but research in this area has either used LC-MS or targeted GC-MS. Despite the challenges with advancing GC-NTA, we call on NTA researchers, grantors, managers, and other stakeholders to recognize the potential and necessity of GC-NTA in PFAS research so that we may face these challenges together.

Indexed as

gas chromatographyGC-NTAnon-targeted analysisPFASsuspect screening

Identifiers

PMID40206203
PMCPMC11977685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.