ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
Serum concentrations of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances and risk of ovarian cancer.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time-Dependent Effects of PFAS and Their Mixtures on Ovarian Epithelial Cell Proliferation and Chemotherapeutic Response.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPerfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are persistent, widespread environmental contaminants, and some are endocrine disrupting. Studies of gynecologic cancers are limited; we evaluated ovarian cancer, a rare, often fatal malignancy.
methodsThis nested case-control study included 318 ovarian cancer cases and 472 individually matched female controls in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, which recruited participants aged 55-74 years from 10 US study centers (1993-2001). We looked at cases through 2016 and quantitated 8 PFAS in prediagnostic serum samples. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous (log2-transformed) and categorized PFAS concentrations by using conditional logistic regression models, implicitly adjusting for matching factors (age, center, year of random assignment, year of blood draw, race and ethnicity) and adjusting for smoking, body mass index, family history of cancer, menopausal hormone therapy and oral contraceptive use, parity, and number of freeze-thaw cycles.
resultsWe found a positive association with ovarian cancer for a doubling in 2-(N-methyl-perfluorooctane sulfonamido) acetic acid (MeFOSAA) concentrations (OR for log2 = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.49) and 62% greater risk among those in the highest quartile (OR for quartile 4 vs quartile 1 = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.54; P for trend = .02). Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) was associated with increased risk (OR for log2 = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.05 to 2.06), with no quartile trend (P for trend = .79). Associations with perfluorononanoic acid (OR for log2 = 1.36, 95% CI = 0.95 to 1.95) and perfluorodecanoic acid (OR for log2 = 1.35, 95% CI = 0.94 to 1.95) were suggested, with nonmonotonic quartile trends (P for trend = .12 to .21). The MeFOSAA associations were strongest in women aged 55-59 years (OR for log 2 = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.13 to 2.27), more moderate in women aged 60-64 years (OR for log2 = 1.31, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.90), and null among women 65 years of age and older (OR for log2 = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.73 to 1.43; P for heterogeneity = .22). Associations persisted in cases diagnosed 8 years or more after blood collection.
conclusionsThese findings offer novel evidence for PFAS as ovarian cancer risk factors, particularly PFOS and MeFOSAA, a PFOS precursor.
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.