| Literature DB >> 29746532 |
Min Joo Kim1, Shinje Moon2, Byung-Chul Oh3, Dawoon Jung4, Kyunghee Ji5, Kyungho Choi6, Young Joo Park1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Many people are exposed to perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) because these substances are widely used as industrial products. Although epidemiological studies suggest that PFASs can disrupt thyroid hormones, the association between PFAS exposure and thyroid function remains inconclusive. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to investigate the association between PFASs exposure and thyroid hormones.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29746532 PMCID: PMC5945046 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197244
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Representation of the search strategy based on PRISMA flow diagram.
Characteristics of studies included.
| Study | Sampling | Location | Population | N | Age (years) Mean | Sex | Chemical (ng/mL) | Thyroid hormone | Statistical analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PFOS | PFOA | PFHxS | Others | |||||||||
| Bloom et al. | 1995–1997 | USA | Sportfish anglers and their partners | 31 | 39 | M:27 | 19.57 | 1.33 | 0.75 | PFDA | TSH | Multiple linear regression models (Log transformed) |
| Crawford et al. | 2008–2009 | USA | Women attempting to conceive | 99 | 33.3 | All F | 9.29 | 2.79 | 1.59 | PFNA | TSH | Pearson correlations |
| Dallaire et al. 2009 | 2004 | Canada | General population | 506 | 36.8 | M: 245 | 18.28 | TSH | Multiple linear regression models (Log transformed) | |||
| Ji et al. | 2008 | Korea | General population | 556 | 42.5 | M: 219 | 7.96 | 2.74 | 1.51 | PFHpS | TSH | Multiple linear regression models (Log transformed) |
| Kato et al. | 2001–2005 | Japan | Pregnant women | 392 | 31.1 | All F | 5.2 | 1.2 | TSH | Spearman correlations | ||
| Lewis et al. | 2011–2012 | USA | General population | 1682 | 40 | M: 858 | 10 | 2.55 | 1.85 | PFNA | TSH | Multiple linear regression models |
| Raymer et al. 2012 | 2002–2005 | USA | IVF Clinic | 246 | 41.6 | All M | 32.3 | 9.2 | TSH | Multiple linear regression models | ||
| Shrestha et al. 2015 | 2005, 2010 | USA | General population | 87 | 63.6 | M: 51 | 31.60 | 9.17 | TSH | Pearson correlations (Log transformed) | ||
| Wang et al. | 1999–2008 | Norway | Pregnant women | 903 | 30 | All F | 12.77 | 2.13 | 0.62 | PFDA | TSH | Multiple linear regression models (Log transformed) |
| Wang et al. | 2000–2001 | Taiwan | Pregnant women | 283 | 28.8 | All F | 12.73 | 2.39 | 0.81 | PFNA | TSH | Multiple linear regression models (Log transformed) |
| Wen et al. | 2007–2010 | USA | General population | 1181 | NA | M: 672 | 14.2 | 4.15 | 2.00 | PFNA | TSH | Multiple linear regression models (Log transformed) |
| Yang et al. | 2013 | China | Pregnant women | 157 | 29.8 | All F | 4.23 | 1.74 | 0.53 | PFNA | TSH | Spearman correlations |
CI, Confidence interval; M, Male; F, Female
a Median
b Interquartile range
c Range (Min–Max)
Fig 2Forest plots of the summary z value with corresponding 95% CIs for the correlation between PFOS and thyroid hormone.
A. Correlation between PFOS and free T4. B. Correlation between PFOS and total T4. C. Correlation between PFOS and total T3 D. Correlation between PFOS and TSH.CI, confidence interval; W, weight.
Association between PFAS and thyroid hormone according to the pregnancy status.
| Pregnant women | General population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No of studies | Pooled z value | I2 | No of studies | Pooled z value | I2 | |
| | 3 | 0.05 (-0.02; 0.11) | 0 | 6 | 0.06 (0.02; 0.09) | 18 |
| | 2 | 0.06 (-0.03; 0.15) | 0 | 6 | 0.00 (-0.07; 0.07) | 74 |
| | 2 | -0.01 (-0.10; 0.09 | 0 | 6 | -0.01 (-0.08; 0.06) | 72 |
| | 4 | -0.08 (-0.12; 0.08) | 89 | 8 | -0.01 (-0.04; 0.02) | 27 |
| | 3 | 0.00 (-0.07; 0.06) | 0 | 5 | 0.01 (-0.02; 0.05) | 11 |
| | 2 | 0.04 (-0.06; 0.13) | 0 | 6 | -0.03 (-0.09; 0.04) | 69 |
| | 2 | 0.04 (-0.05; 0.14) | 29 | 5 | 0.05 (-0.01; 0.11) | 56 |
| | 4 | 0.00 (-0.05; 0.04) | 44 | 6 | 0.00 (-0.03; 0.04) | 32 |
| | 2 | 0.01 (-0.01; 0.05) | 0 | 4 | 0.02 (-0.01; 0.05) | 0 |
| | 2 | 0.01 (-0.18; 0.20) | 74 | 4 | -0.04 (-0.07; -0.01) | 1 |
| | 2 | -0.01 (-0.16; 0.14) | 57 | 3 | 0.01 (-0.03; 0.04) | 0 |
| | 3 | 0.00 (-0.12; 0.13) | 74 | 5 | 0.00 (-0.04; 0.03) | 0 |
Fig 3Forest plots of the summary z value with corresponding 95% CIs for the correlation between PFOA and thyroid hormone.
A. Correlation between PFOA and free T4. B. Correlation between PFOA and total T4. C. Correlation between PFOA and total T3 D. Correlation between PFOA and TSH.CI, confidence interval; W, weight.
Fig 4Forest plots of the summary z value with corresponding 95% CIs for the correlation between PFHxS and thyroid hormone.
A. Correlation between PFHxS and free T4. B. Correlation between PFHxS and total T4. C. Correlation between PFHxS and total T3 D. Correlation between PFHxS and TSH.CI, confidence interval; W, weight.