ReviewEnvironmental health : a global access science source2026
Bisphenol A and cancer: a critical review of the epidemiologic literature with an emphasis on exposure assessment.
Review in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBisphenol A (BPA) is a high production volume chemical that has been used for decades in numerous consumer and industrial applications. Daily exposure to BPA is likely; it is readily detected in >90% of the general population despite being rapidly metabolized and excreted. BPA's toxicity, including endocrine disrupting activity, has sparked public health concern. We comprehensively reviewed the epidemiologic literature on the carcinogenicity of BPA and highlighted exposure assessment considerations that impact study interpretation.
methodsMultiple biomedical databases were searched through February 2025 for peer-reviewed cancer epidemiology studies that assessed associations with BPA exposure. Studies of the following designs (or a variant) were included: cohort, case-control, cross-sectional. A detailed bias assessment was conducted with guidance from the Report on Carcinogens Handbook and the International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs Preamble.
resultsOf the 139 records identified, 43 epidemiological studies were reviewed; all were conducted in the general population. We focused the review on cancers of the breast and prostate because they had the highest number of cohort or case-control studies, but all cancer sites were summarized in the appendix for completeness. Generally, there were mixed results for associations with BPA. Interpretation was hampered by the high potential for exposure measurement error and the inability to characterize past BPA exposure, necessary to assess cancer outcomes with long latency. The majority of studies relied on biomonitoring using short-term biomarkers of recent BPA exposure, and measured BPA in urine at a single time point post-diagnosis; this failed to capture the critical time window of susceptibility, rule out reverse causation, or characterize temporal variation in BPA exposure.
conclusionsThe epidemiologic evidence was inadequate to evaluate the carcinogenicity of BPA - mainly due to exposure measurement error and misclassification, limited number of studies by cancer site, and heterogeneity in the results and study methodology. The inadequate evidence base cannot rule out potential carcinogenicity of BPA in humans. Future studies conducted within highly exposed occupational cohorts, with prospective and longitudinal collection of quantitative exposure data (e.g., BPA levels) and assessment of cancer outcomes or acute endpoints involved in established mechanisms of carcinogenesis (e.g., receptor mediated effects) are likely to be informative.
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.