Cited by 220Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals

Enhanced Elimination of Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid by Menstruating Women: Evidence from Population-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling

Wong, Fiona, MacLeod, Matthew, Mueller, Jochen F., Cousins, Ian T.·2014·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Human biomonitoring studies have shown that concentrations of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) in men are higher than in women. We investigate sex differences in elimination of PFOS by fitting a population-based pharmacokinetic model to six cross-sectional data sets from 1999 to 2012 from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and derive human first-order elimination rate constants (kE) and corresponding elimination half-lives (t1/2) for PFOS, where t1/2 = ln 2/kE. We use a modified version of the Ritter population-based pharmacokinetic model and derive elimination rate constants separately for men and women. The model accounts for population-average lifetime changes in PFOS intake, body weight, and menstruation rate. We compare the model-derived elimination rate constant for hypothetical nonmenstruating women to the elimination rate constant for men and women when menstruation is included as a loss process to evaluate the hypothesis that loss of PFOS by menstruation is an important process for women. The modeled elimination half-life for men is 4.7 years, and the modeled elimination half-life for women when excluding losses from menstruation is 3.7 years. The elimination half-life for women when menstruation is included in the model is 4.0 years. Thus, menstruation accounts for 30% of the discrepancy in elimination of PFOS between men and women. The remaining discrepancy is likely due to other sex-specific elimination routes that are not considered in our modeling.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es500796y

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wong, F., MacLeod, M., Mueller, J. F., & Cousins, I. T.
Affiliations
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Wong, Fiona
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2014-07-08
Volume
48
Issue
15
Pages
8807-8814
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W1971106859
Cited by
220
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5
FWCI
8.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Science & Technology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Keywords
PFOS, menstruation, sex differences, elimination half-life, elimination rate constant, lifetime exposure
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Weight, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Environmental Monitoring, Environmental Pollutants, Female, Fluorocarbons, Half-Life, Humans, Male, Menstruation, Middle Aged, Models, Theoretical, Nutrition Surveys, Sex Characteristics, Alkanesulfonic Acids, Young Adult

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