Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36085159›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health : a global access science source2022

Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) as risk factors for breast cancer: a case-control study in Chinese population.

Xuejun Li, Fengju Song, Xiaotu Liu, Anqi Shan, Yubei Huang, Zhengjun Yang, Haixin Li, Qiaoyun Yang, Yue Yu, Hong Zheng and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Xuejun Li *Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Center for International Collaborative Research on Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, No.22 Qixiangtai Road, Heping District, Tianjin, 300070, China.
Fengju Song *Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy in Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Molecular Cancer Epidemiology of Tianjin, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Xiaotu Liu *School of Environment, Guangzhou Key Laboratory of Environmental Exposure and Health, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution and Health, Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510632, China.
Anqi ShanDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Center for International Collaborative Research on Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, No.22 Qixiangtai Road, Heping District, Tianjin, 300070, China.
Yubei HuangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy in Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Molecular Cancer Epidemiology of Tianjin, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Zhengjun YangThe First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Haixin LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy in Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Molecular Cancer Epidemiology of Tianjin, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Qiaoyun YangDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Center for International Collaborative Research on Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, No.22 Qixiangtai Road, Heping District, Tianjin, 300070, China.
Yue YuThe First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Hong ZhengDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy in Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Molecular Cancer Epidemiology of Tianjin, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Xu-Chen CaoThe First Department of Breast Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Da ChenSchool of Environment, Guangzhou Key Laboratory of Environmental Exposure and Health, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution and Health, Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510632, China.
Ke-Xin ChenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy in Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Molecular Cancer Epidemiology of Tianjin, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, 300060, China.
Xi ChenDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Center for International Collaborative Research on Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, No.22 Qixiangtai Road, Heping District, Tianjin, 300070, China. chenxi@tmu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-1185-9828
Nai-Jun TangDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Center for International Collaborative Research on Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environment, Nutrition, and Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, No.22 Qixiangtai Road, Heping District, Tianjin, 300070, China. tangnaijun@tmu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-1177-252X
Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CNTianjin Medical University · CNJinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are a large family of synthetic chemicals, some of which are mammary toxicants and endocrine disruptors. Recent studies have implicated exposure to PFASs as a risk factor for breast cancer in Europe and America. Little is known about the role of PFASs with respect to breast cancer in the Chinese population.

methodsParticipants who were initially diagnosed with breast cancer at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between 2012 and 2016 were recruited as cases. The controls were randomly selected from the participants with available blood samples in the Chinese National Breast Cancer Screening Program (CNBCSP) cohort. Ultimately, we enrolled 373 breast cancer patients and 657 controls. Plasma PFASs were measured by an ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) system coupled to a 5500 Q-Trap triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. A logistic regression model with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regularization was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the relationships between PFASs and breast cancer. The three most predictive variables in the LASSO model were selected from 17 PFASs, which was based on the optimal penalty coefficient (λ = 0.0218) identified with the minimum criterion. Additionally, Bayesian kernel machine regression (BKMR) and quantile g-computation models were applied to evaluate the associations between separate and mixed exposure to PFASs and breast cancer.

resultsPerfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) exhibited the highest concentration in both the cases and controls. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluoro-n-decanoic acid (PFDA) were positively associated with breast cancer, and perfluoro-n-tridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) was negatively associated with breast cancer according to both the continuous-PFASs and the quartile-PFASs logistic regression models. Of note, PFOA was associated with the occurrence of estrogen receptor (ER)-, progesterone receptor (PR)-, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer (OR

conclusionsOverall, we observed that PFASs were associated with breast cancer in Chinese women. Prospective cohort studies and mechanistic experiments are warranted to elucidate whether these associations are causal.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFluorocarbonsBayes TheoremCase-Control StudiesChinaFemaleHumansProspective StudiesRisk FactorsFluorocarbonsBayesian kernel machine regression (BKMR)Breast cancerCase–control studyChinese populationLeast absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO)Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs)Quantile g-computation approach

Identifiers

PMID36085159
PMCPMC9463854
OpenAlexW4295136459

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.