Cited by 261Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFluoride Effects and RemovalChemical Analysis and Environmental Impact

Measurement of Novel, Drinking Water-Associated PFAS in Blood from Adults and Children in Wilmington, North Carolina

Open access
Kotlarz, Nadine, McCord, James, Collier, David, Lea, C. Suzanne, Strynar, Mark, Lindstrom, Andrew B., Wilkie, Adrien A., Islam, Jessica Y. +9 more·2020·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

BACKGROUND: From 1980 to 2017, a fluorochemical manufacturing facility discharged wastewater containing poorly understood per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to the Cape Fear River, the primary drinking water source for Wilmington, North Carolina, residents. Those PFAS included several fluoroethers including HFPO-DA also known as GenX. Little is known about the bioaccumulation potential of these fluoroethers. OBJECTIVE: We determined levels of fluoroethers and legacy PFAS in serum samples from Wilmington residents. METHODS: of age into the GenX Exposure Study and collected blood samples. Repeated blood samples were collected from 44 participants 6 months after enrollment. We analyzed serum for 10 fluoroethers and 10 legacy PFAS using liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry. RESULTS: ). CONCLUSION: Poorly understood fluoroethers released into the Cape Fear River by a fluorochemical manufacturing facility were detected in blood samples from Wilmington, North Carolina, residents. Health implications of exposure to these novel PFAS have not been well characterized. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6837.

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/ehp6837

Cites

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?

  • To date, the investigation of alternative PFAS compounds within human blood has been limited; few studies have either failed to detect their presence or have identified minimal levels.

    “To date, the investigation of alternative PFAS compounds within human blood has been limited. Few studies have either failed to detect their presence or have identified minimal levels [13,14,15].”

    From The EU’s Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Ban: A Case of Policy over Science (2023) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says these were, to the authors’ knowledge, the first human measurements of five fluoroethers, supporting the claim that investigation of some alternative PFAS in blood was limited. The Results (page unavailable) report nondetection of GenX and of fluoroethers in a small comparison group, but do not establish that the few prior studies generally found nondetection or minimal levels. In the Wilmington cohort, two fluoroethers were detected in almost all participants. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 55 · Cited by 261

Authors
Kotlarz, N., McCord, J., Collier, D., Lea, C. S., Strynar, M., Lindstrom, A. B., Wilkie, A. A., Islam, J. Y., Matney, K., Tarte, P., Polera, M. E., Burdette, K., DeWitt, J., May, K., Smart, R. C., Knappe, D. R. U., & Hoppin, J. A.
Affiliations
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • New Hanover County Health Department, Wilmington, North Carolina, USA
  • Cape Fear River Watch, Wilmington, North Carolina, USA
Corresponding author
Hoppin, Jane A.
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
2020-07
Volume
128
Issue
7
Pages
77005-77005
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W3044043940
Cited by
261
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 8
FWCI
11.12
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 (R21ES029353, T32ES007018, P30ES025128)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD067683, R21HD060229)
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 › Chemical Analysis and Environmental Impact
Keywords
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, GenX, HFPO-DA, legacy PFAS, serum PFAS levels, bioaccumulation, drinking water contamination, Cape Fear River, Wilmington, North Carolina, children and adults, repeated blood sampling
MeSH terms
Adult, Caprylates, Child, Environmental Exposure, Female, Fluorocarbons, Humans, Male, North Carolina, Nutrition Surveys, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Alkanesulfonic Acids, Rivers, Drinking Water

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