Alison E Hipwell1, Linda G Kahn2, Pam Factor-Litvak3, Christina A Porucznik4, Eva L Siegel3, Raina N Fichorova5, Richard F Hamman6, Michele Klein-Fedyshin7, Kim G Harley8. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, 3811 O'Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 2. Department of Pediatrics, New York University School of Medicine, 403 East 34th Street, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 West 168 Street, New York, NY, USA. 4. Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 5. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Department of Epidemiology, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, 13001 East 17th Place, Denver, CO, USA. 7. Health Sciences Library System, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 3550 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 8. Center for Environmental Research and Children's Health, University of California Berkeley, 1995 University Avenue, Berkley CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to non-persistent chemicals in consumer products is ubiquitous and associated with endocrine-disrupting effects. These effects have been linked to infertility and adverse pregnancy outcomes in some studies and could affect couple fecundability, i.e. the capacity to conceive a pregnancy, quantified as time to pregnancy (TTP). OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: Few epidemiologic studies have examined the impact of non-persistent chemicals specifically on TTP, and the results of these studies have not been synthesized. We undertook a systematic review to summarize the strength of evidence for associations of common non-persistent chemicals with couple fecundability and to identify gaps and limitations in the literature, with the aim of informing policy decisions and future research. SEARCH METHODS: We performed an electronic search of English language literature published between 1 January 2007 and 25 August 2017 in MEDLINE, EMBASE.com, Global Health, DART/TOXLINE, POPLINE and DESTAF. We included human retrospective and prospective cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies that examined phthalates, bisphenol A, triclosan, triclocarban, benzophenones, parabens and glycol ethers in consumer products, and considered TTP or fecundability as an outcome among women, men and couples conceiving without medical assistance. We excluded editorials, opinion pieces, introductions to special sections, articles that described only lifestyle (e.g. caffeine, stress) or clinical factors (e.g. semen parameters, IVF success). Standardized forms for screening, data extraction and study quality were developed using DistillerSR software and completed in duplicate. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias and devised additional quality metrics based on specific methodological features of fecundability studies. OUTCOMES: The search returned 3456 articles. There were 15 papers from 12 studies which met inclusion criteria, of which eight included biomarkers of chemical exposure. Studies varied widely in terms of exposure characterization, precluding a meta-analytic approach. Among the studies that measured exposure using biospecimens, results were equivocal for associations between either male or female phthalate exposure and TTP. There was preliminary support for associations of female exposure to some parabens and glycol ethers and of male exposure to benzophenone with longer TTP, but further research and replication of these results are needed. The results provided little to no indication that bisphenol A, triclocarban or triclosan exposure was associated with TTP. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Despite a growing literature on couple exposure to non-persistent endocrine-disrupting chemicals and fecundability, evidence for associations between biologically measured exposures and TTP is limited. Equivocal results with different non-persistent chemical compounds and metabolites complicate the interpretation of our findings with respect to TTP, but do not preclude action, given the documented endocrine disrupting effects on other reproductive outcomes as well as fetal development. We therefore advocate for common-sense lifestyle changes in which both females and males seeking to conceive minimize their exposure to non-persistent chemicals. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018084304.
BACKGROUND: Exposure to non-persistent chemicals in consumer products is ubiquitous and associated with endocrine-disrupting effects. These effects have been linked to infertility and adverse pregnancy outcomes in some studies and could affect couple fecundability, i.e. the capacity to conceive a pregnancy, quantified as time to pregnancy (TTP). OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: Few epidemiologic studies have examined the impact of non-persistent chemicals specifically on TTP, and the results of these studies have not been synthesized. We undertook a systematic review to summarize the strength of evidence for associations of common non-persistent chemicals with couple fecundability and to identify gaps and limitations in the literature, with the aim of informing policy decisions and future research. SEARCH METHODS: We performed an electronic search of English language literature published between 1 January 2007 and 25 August 2017 in MEDLINE, EMBASE.com, Global Health, DART/TOXLINE, POPLINE and DESTAF. We included human retrospective and prospective cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies that examined phthalates, bisphenol A, triclosan, triclocarban, benzophenones, parabens and glycol ethers in consumer products, and considered TTP or fecundability as an outcome among women, men and couples conceiving without medical assistance. We excluded editorials, opinion pieces, introductions to special sections, articles that described only lifestyle (e.g. caffeine, stress) or clinical factors (e.g. semen parameters, IVF success). Standardized forms for screening, data extraction and study quality were developed using DistillerSR software and completed in duplicate. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias and devised additional quality metrics based on specific methodological features of fecundability studies. OUTCOMES: The search returned 3456 articles. There were 15 papers from 12 studies which met inclusion criteria, of which eight included biomarkers of chemical exposure. Studies varied widely in terms of exposure characterization, precluding a meta-analytic approach. Among the studies that measured exposure using biospecimens, results were equivocal for associations between either male or female phthalate exposure and TTP. There was preliminary support for associations of female exposure to some parabens and glycol ethers and of male exposure to benzophenone with longer TTP, but further research and replication of these results are needed. The results provided little to no indication that bisphenol A, triclocarban or triclosan exposure was associated with TTP. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Despite a growing literature on couple exposure to non-persistent endocrine-disrupting chemicals and fecundability, evidence for associations between biologically measured exposures and TTP is limited. Equivocal results with different non-persistent chemical compounds and metabolites complicate the interpretation of our findings with respect to TTP, but do not preclude action, given the documented endocrine disrupting effects on other reproductive outcomes as well as fetal development. We therefore advocate for common-sense lifestyle changes in which both females and males seeking to conceive minimize their exposure to non-persistent chemicals. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018084304.
Authors: L E Dodge; P L Williams; M A Williams; S A Missmer; I Souter; A M Calafat; R Hauser Journal: Reprod Toxicol Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 3.143
Authors: Joe M Braun; Kristen W Smith; Paige L Williams; Antonia M Calafat; Katharine Berry; Shelley Ehrlich; Russ Hauser Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Ruthann A Rudel; Janet M Gray; Connie L Engel; Teresa W Rawsthorne; Robin E Dodson; Janet M Ackerman; Jeanne Rizzo; Janet L Nudelman; Julia Green Brody Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2011-03-30 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Jennifer J Yland; Taiyao Wang; Zahra Zad; Sydney K Willis; Tanran R Wang; Amelia K Wesselink; Tammy Jiang; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise; Ioannis Ch Paschalidis Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Linda G Kahn; Kim G Harley; Eva L Siegel; Yeyi Zhu; Pam Factor-Litvak; Christina A Porucznik; Michele Klein-Fedyshin; Alison E Hipwell Journal: Hum Reprod Update Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 15.610
Authors: Donatella Caserta; Flavia Costanzi; Maria Paola De Marco; Luisa Di Benedetto; Eleonora Matteucci; Chiara Assorgi; Maria Clara Pacilli; Aris Raad Besharat; Filippo Bellati; Ilary Ruscito Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 3.390