ArticleArchives of toxicology2026
PFAS: challenges and scientific perspectives in human health risk assessment.
Article in Archives of toxicology, 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
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To review recent advances in research on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and outline priority steps for risk assessment in consumer health protection, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) organized the 'International PFAS Conference' in Berlin in October 2025. Building on the European Food Safety Authority's (EFSA) opinion in 2020, global research activities on PFAS have intensified. The conference was attended by 200 participants from 18 countries and covered topics such as analytical methods, human exposure, toxicokinetics, toxicity, and future perspectives. Given that there are more than 21,000 different PFAS in use, discussions highlighted the need for further data collection and a basis for prioritizing substances. Robust exposure assessment requires improved analytical methods combined with newly developed predictive tools to quantify, identify, and make better use of non-target data. Hazard characterization may benefit from the combined use of classic experimental data sets, epidemiological data, and new approach methodologies (NAMs) data. The participants emphasized the continuous need for refined data and proposed a systematic consolidation of global data on shared data platforms, accompanied by corresponding guidelines for data usage. In the final panel discussion, effective risk communication was identified as a critical challenge, necessitating clear and consistent messaging for the public and policymakers. The conference concluded with five key recommendations for future health risk assessments: prioritizing PFAS; improving analytical methods; promoting generation of robust data and data gap filling; promoting open science, including the development of shared data infrastructure and cross-institutional knowledge exchange; and strengthening risk communication. These recommendations aim to support transparent, evidence-based and effective PFAS consumer health risk management in the decades ahead.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42637957What 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.