Cited by 64Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety

How Wastewater Reflects Human Metabolism─Suspect Screening of Pharmaceutical Metabolites in Wastewater Influent

Open access
Meyer, Corina, Stravs, Michael A., Hollender, Juliane·2024·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Pharmaceuticals and their human metabolites are contaminants of emerging concern in the aquatic environment. Most monitoring studies focus on a limited set of parent compounds and even fewer metabolites. However, more than 50% of the most consumed pharmaceuticals are excreted in higher amounts as metabolites than as parents, as confirmed by a literature analysis within this study. Hence, we applied a wide-scope suspect screening approach to identify human pharmaceutical metabolites in wastewater influent from three Swiss treatment plants. Based on consumption amounts and human metabolism data, a suspect list comprising 268 parent compounds and over 1500 metabolites was compiled. Online solid phase extraction combined with liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry was used to analyze the samples. Data processing, annotation, and structure elucidation were achieved with various tools, including molecular networking as well as SIRIUS/CSI:FingerID and MetFrag for MS2 spectra rationalization. We confirmed 37 metabolites with reference standards and 16 by human liver S9 incubation experiments. More than 25 metabolites were detected for the first time in influent wastewater. Semiquantification with MS2Quant showed that metabolite to parent concentration ratios were generally lower compared to literature expectations, probably due to further metabolite transformation in the sewer system or limitations in the metabolite detection. Nonetheless, metabolites pose a large fraction to the total pharmaceutical contribution in wastewater, highlighting the need for metabolite inclusion in chemical risk assessment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.est.4c00968

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The observed relative contribution of trimethoprim appears consistent with the excretion fractions reported in recent environmental studies.

    “the relative contribution of trimethoprim that we found appears consistent with the excretion fractions reported in recent environmental studies [2,36].”

    From Pharmacometabolomics Study of Sulfamethoxazole and Trimethoprim in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Real-World Metabolism and Urinary Excretion (2025) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Results and Discussion section, “Literature vs Monitored Metabolites/Parent Ratios” (page unavailable), compares measured ratios with literature expectations for other pharmaceuticals. Searches for trimethoprim and its excretion fraction returned no passage addressing whether the citing authors’ observed contribution is consistent with a reported fraction. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Csárdi G.; Nepusz T.; Traag V.; Horvát S.; Zanini F.; Noom D.; Müller K. Igraph: Network Analysis and Visualization in R. 2023. https://cran.r-project.org/package=igraph. PMC13436765 42550872
  2. Benzophenone. 2012. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK373188/ (accessed January 26, 2024).
  3. Opie L. H.; Pfeffer M. A. Drugs for the Heart, 7th ed.; Opie L. H., Bernard J. G., Braunwald E., Walker J., Eds.; Saunders, 2008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meyer, C., Stravs, M. A., & Hollender, J.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (CH)
Corresponding author
Hollender, Juliane
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2024-05-24
Volume
58
Issue
22
Pages
9828-9839
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W4398768060
Cited by
64
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 3
FWCI
6.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Science & Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DORA Eawag (Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
Funders
HORIZON EUROPE Health (101057014)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Pesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Keywords
drug metabolites, wastewater treatment plant influent, suspect screening, human metabolism, emerging contaminants, molecular networking, chemical risk assessment, wastewater treatment plants
MeSH terms
Chromatography, Liquid, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Environmental Monitoring, Humans, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Solid Phase Extraction, Tandem Mass Spectrometry, Wastewater

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review