Cited by 57Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFluoride Effects and RemovalToxic Organic Pollutants Impact

Bayesian estimation of human population toxicokinetics of PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, and PFNA from studies of contaminated drinking water

Open access
Chiu, Weihsueh A., Lynch, Meghan T., Lay, Claire R., Antezana, Adriana, Malek, Parker, Sokolinski, Sara, Rogers, Rachel D.·2022·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

Background: Setting health-protective standards for poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure requires estimates of their population toxicokinetics, but existing studies have reported widely varying PFAS half-lives (T½) and volumes of distribution (Vd). Objectives: We combined data from multiple studies to develop harmonized estimates of T½ and Vd, along with their interindividual variability, for four PFAS commonly found in drinking water: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS). Methods: We identified published data on PFAS concentrations in human serum with corresponding drinking water measurements, separated into training and testing data sets. We fit training data sets to a one-compartment model incorporating interindividual variability, time-dependent drinking water concentrations, and background exposures. Use of a hierarchical Bayesian approach allowed us to incorporate informative priors at the population level, as well as at the study level. We compared posterior predictions to testing data sets to evaluate model performance. Results: Posterior median (95% CI) estimates of T½ (in years) for the population geometric mean were 3.14 (2.69, 3.73) for PFOA, 3.36 (2.52, 4.42) for PFOS, 2.35 (1.65, 3.16) for PFNA, and 8.30 (5.38, 13.5) for PFHxS, all of which were within the range of previously published values. The extensive individual-level data for PFOA allowed accurate estimation of population variability, with a population geometric standard deviation of 1.57 (95% CI: 1.42, 1.73); data from other PFAS were also consistent with this degree of population variability. Vd estimates ranged from 0.19 to 0.43L/kg across the four PFAS, which tended to be slightly higher than previously published estimates. Discussion: These results have direct application in both risk assessment (quantitative interspecies extrapolation and uncertainty factors for interindividual variability) and risk communication (interpretation of monitoring data). In addition, this study provides a rigorous methodology for further refinement with additional data, as well as application to other PFAS. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP10103

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 · 10.1289/ehp10103

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • Another significant source of uncertainty in half-life estimation could be due to the possible ongoing and/or unaccounted background exposures, and to the possible role of individual determinants (such as sex, age, genetics and general health), which may contribute to interindividual variation.

    “Another significant source of uncertainty in half-life estimation could be due to the possible ongoing and/or unaccounted background exposures (Dourson and Gadagbui, 2021), and to the possible role of individual determinants (such as sex, age, genetics and general health), which may contribute to interindividual variation (Bois et al., 2010; Chiu et al., 2022).”

    From Estimation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) half-lives in human studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Chiu et al., 2022

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Most human studies on PFAS toxicokinetic processes focused on long chain PFAS, showing heterogeneous estimates among chemical compounds and investigated populations.

    “Most human studies on PFAS toxicokinetic processes focused on long chain PFAS, showing heterogeneous estimates among chemical compounds and investigated populations (Chiu et al., 2022), potentially due to the variability of exposure settings and concentration levels (Worley et al., 2017).”
  • Only studies conducted after the cessation of the most substantial exposure to PFAS were included, because persistent and ongoing exposures can influence half-life estimation, leading to potential overestimation.

    “We decided to include only studies that were conducted after the cessation of the most substantial exposure to PFAS (i.e. principally contaminated drinking water or occupational exposure), as persistent and ongoing exposures can influence half-life estimation, leading to a potential overestimation of results (Russell et al., 2015; Chiu et al., 2022).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chiu, W. A., Lynch, M. T., Lay, C. R., Antezana, A., Malek, P., Sokolinski, S., & Rogers, R. D.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Abt Global (United States) (US)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Corresponding author
Lynch, Meghan T.
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
2022-12
Volume
130
Issue
12
Pages
127001-127001
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W4310700145
Cited by
57
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 7
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Environmental Health Perspectives (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (P30ES029067, P42ES027704)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Fluoride Effects and Removal
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Keywords
PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid, PFOS, PFHxS, perfluorononanoic acid, toxicokinetics, half-life, volume of distribution, interindividual variability, drinking water contamination, Bayesian hierarchical model, one-compartment model
MeSH terms
Alkanesulfonates, Bayes Theorem, Caprylates, Fatty Acids, Fluorocarbons, Humans, Alkanesulfonic Acids, Drinking Water, Toxicokinetics

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