Author(s):
Mhaouty-Kodja, Sakina ; Zalko, Daniel ; Tait, Sabrina ; Testai, Emanuela ; Viguié, Catherine ; Corsini, Emanuela ; Grova, Nathalie ; Buratti, Franca Maria ; Cabaton, Nicolas J. ; Coppola, Lucia ; De la Vieja, Antonio ; Dusinska, Maria ; El Yamani, Naouale ; Galbiati, Valentina ; Iglesias-Hernández, Patricia ; Kohl, Yvonne ; Maddalon, Ambra ; Marcon, Francesca ; Naulé, Lydie ; Rundén-Pran, Elise ; Salani, Francesca ; Santori, Nicoletta ; Torres-Ruiz, Mónica ; Turner, Jonathan D. ; Adamovsky, Ondrej ; Aiello-Holden, Kiara ; Dirven, Hubert ; Louro, Henriqueta ; Silva, Maria João
Date: 2024
Persistent ID: http://hdl.handle.net/10362/174432
Origin: Repositório Institucional da UNL
Subject(s): Bisphenol A alternatives; carcinogenesis; developmental neurotoxicity; endocrine disruption; genotoxicity; human health; immunotoxicity; metabolism; toxicokinetic; Toxicology; SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
Description
Funding Information: This review was prepared on the initiative of a small group of authors (editorial group), who agreed on its general structure and the information to be included. The editorial group worked together with the remaining coauthors to develop the content of the various sections, draft the text and revise it. The group was also responsible for reading, harmonizing and revising the text, to get the final submitted version. All authors developed the work in the course of their employment at their respective organizations and under the scope of the Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC) that has received funding from the European Union\u2019s Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No. 101057014. None of the authors declared a competing financial interest; none declared professional or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work presented or constitute a conflict of interest. The European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals has received funding from the European Union\u2019s Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No. 101057014. This work was also supported from the European Union\u2019s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No. 857560. The authors also acknowledge co-funding by their organizations and the following entities: Centre for Toxicogenomics and Human Health (ToxOmics), DOI 10.54499/UIDP/00009/2020 ( https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDP/00009/2020 ) and DOI 10.54499/UIDB/00009/2020 ( https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/00009/2020 ); Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion (MICIN) and Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) PID2021-125948OB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033. Dr. Adamovsky thanks The Czech Science Foundation (GACR), Project 23-13617L, for support in plastic and plastic additives research. Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Bisphenol A (BPA), a synthetic chemical widely used in the production of polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins, has been associated with a variety of adverse effects in humans including metabolic, immunological, reproductive, and neurodevelopmental effects, raising concern about its health impact. In the EU, it has been classified as toxic to reproduction and as an endocrine disruptor and was thus included in the candidate list of substances of very high concern (SVHC). On this basis, its use has been banned or restricted in some products. As a consequence, industries turned to bisphenol alternatives, such as bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF), which are now found in various consumer products, as well as in human matrices at a global scale. However, due to their toxicity, these two bisphenols are in the process of being regulated. Other BPA alternatives, whose potential toxicity remains largely unknown due to a knowledge gap, have also started to be used in manufacturing processes. The gradual restriction of the use of BPA underscores the importance of understanding the potential risks associated with its alternatives to avoid regrettable substitutions. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on the potential hazards related to BPA alternatives prioritized by European Regulatory Agencies based on their regulatory relevance and selected to be studied under the European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC): BPE, BPAP, BPP, BPZ, BPS-MAE, and TCBPA. The focus is on data related to toxicokinetic, endocrine disruption, immunotoxicity, developmental neurotoxicity, and genotoxicity/carcinogenicity, which were considered the most relevant endpoints to assess the hazard related to those substances. The goal here is to identify the data gaps in BPA alternatives toxicology and hence formulate the future directions that will be taken in the frame of the PARC project, which seeks also to enhance chemical risk assessment methodologies using new approach methodologies (NAMs).
