Comparison of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance exposure levels in neonatal cord blood between an e-waste recycling area and a general exposure area

Zaya GERILI; LI Jingguang; WANG Yuxin; CUI Shiwei; ZHANG Lei; SUN Xin

doi:10.11836/JEOM24013

Volume 41 Issue 8

Sep. 2024

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Supplements

Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine > 2024 > 41(8): 876-883. > DOI: 10.11836/JEOM24013

Zaya GERILI, LI Jingguang, WANG Yuxin, CUI Shiwei, ZHANG Lei, SUN Xin. Comparison of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance exposure levels in neonatal cord blood between an e-waste recycling area and a general exposure area[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2024, 41(8): 876-883. DOI: 10.11836/JEOM24013

Citation:

PDF (827 KB)

Comparison of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance exposure levels in neonatal cord blood between an e-waste recycling area and a general exposure area

1.
Key Laboratory of Chemical Pollution and Health Safety, National Institute of Occupational Health and Poison Control, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China
2.
National Health Commission Key Laboratory of Food Safety Risk Assessment, National Center for Food Safety Risk Assessment, Beijing 100022, China

Funds: This study was funded.

More Information

Corresponding author:
ZHANG Lei, E-mail: zhanglei@cfsa.net.cn

SUN Xin, E-mail: sunxin@niohp.chinacdc.cn
Received Date: January 11, 2024
Accepted Date: June 02, 2024

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Background
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of persistent organic pollu-tants. Industrial production and consumer use of PFAS are the primary sources of exposure in urban areas. E-waste recycling activities are also a significant source of environmental PFAS exposure.
Objective
To compare exposure profiles between traditional and emerging PFAS in neonatal cord blood collected from an e-waste recycling area and a general exposure area characterized by modern economic development (hereafter referred to as general exposure area).
Methods
Based on a birth cohort study conducted in 2018, 85 pregnant women were recruited (36 participants from an e-waste recycling area and 49 participants from a general exposure area). Neonatal cord blood was collected at delivery. Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) was used to detect 28 common PFAS in the blood. A structured questionnaire was used to gather sociodemographic characteristics of the pregnant women. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare PFAS exposure levels in neonatal cord blood between the e-waste recycling area and the general exposure area. Multiple linear regression models were used to explore the influence of residing in the e-waste recycling area on neonatal PFAS exposure, with area as the independent variable and the natural logarithm of PFAS exposure levels as the dependent variable.
Results
A total of 22 PFAS were positive in neonatal cord blood, of which 13 congeners were 100% detectable in the samples from both areas. The median ∑PFAS exposure levels in neonatal cord blood were 14.19 ng·mL⁻¹ and 14.02 ng·mL⁻¹ for the e-waste recycling area and the general exposure area, respectively, with linear perfluorooctanoic acid (L-PFOA) showing the highest median concentration (5.49 ng·mL⁻¹ and 6.39 ng·mL⁻¹, respectively). The results of Mann-Whitney U tests showed that the median exposure levels of long-chain perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA), perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnDA), perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoDA), and perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA), as well as emerging alternatives 6:2 chlorinated polyfluorinated ether sulfonate (6:2 Cl-PFESA) and 8:2 chlorinated polyfluorinated ether sulfonate (8:2 Cl-PFESA), were higher in the e-waste recycling area than in the general exposure area. In contrast, the median exposure levels of short-chain perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA) and perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), as well as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) branched isomers, including perfluoro-6-methylheptanoic acid (iso-PFOA), perfluoro-5-methylheptanoic acid (5m-PFOA), and perfluoro-4-methylheptanoic acid (4m-PFOA), were lower in the e-waste recycling area than in the general exposure area (P<0.05). The multiple linear regression models showed that, compared to the general exposure area, neonatal cord blood in the e-waste recycling area had significantly higher exposure levels of long-chain PFDA, PFUnDA, PFDoDA, PFTrDA, and emerging alternatives 6:2 Cl-PFESA and 8:2 Cl-PFESA, with odds ratios of 1.95 (95%CI: 1.39-2.75), 2.10 (95%CI: 1.58-2.75), 2.12 (95%CI: 1.39-3.25), 2.64 (95%CI: 1.63-4.22), 3.46 (95%CI: 2.34-5.10), and 3.25 (95%CI: 2.01-5.26), respectively. Conversely, the exposure levels of short-chain PFPeA, PFHxA, and branched PFOA (br-PFOA) were significantly lower, with odds ratios of 0.44 (95%CI: 0.38-0.52), 0.30 (95%CI: 0.16-0.57), and 0.50 (95%CI: 0.38-0.67), respectively.
Conclusion
PFAS are widely present in neonatal cord blood in both the e-waste recycling area and the general exposure area. Compared to the general exposure area, the neonatal cord blood samples in the e-waste recycling area show higher exposure levels of certain long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCA) and emerging PFAS alternatives, while the neonatal cord blood samples in the general exposure area show higher exposure levels of some short-chain PFCA and PFOA branched isomers.
- per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances,
- cord blood,
- e-waste recycling area,
- exposure level

FullText(HTML)

References (33)

References

[1]	BUCK R C, FRANKLIN J, BERGER U, et al. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment: terminology, classification, and origins[J]. Integr Environ Assess Manag, 2011, 7(4): 513-541. doi: 10.1002/ieam.258
[2]	GLÜGE J, SCHERINGER M, COUSINS I T, et al. An overview of the uses of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)[J]. Environ Sci: Process Impacts, 2020, 22(12): 2345-2373. doi: 10.1039/D0EM00291G
[3]	PANIERI E, BARALIC K, DJUKIC-COSIC D, et al. PFAS molecules: a major concern for the human health and the environment[J]. Toxics, 2022, 10(2): 44. doi: 10.3390/toxics10020044
[4]	SUNDERLAND E M, HU X C, DASSUNCAO C, et al. A review of the pathways of human exposure to poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and present understanding of health effects[J]. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol, 2019, 29(2): 131-147. doi: 10.1038/s41370-018-0094-1
[5]	CONVENTION S. The new POPs under the Stockholm Convention [EB/OL]. (2023-05)[2024-07-05]. https://pops.int/theconvention/thepops/thenewpops/tabid/2511/default.aspx .
[6]	BRENNAN N M, EVANS A T, FRITZ M K, et al. Trends in the regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): a scoping review[J]. lnt J Environ Res Public Health, 2021, 18(20): 10900. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182010900
[7]	ATEIA M, MAROLI A, THARAYIL N, et al. The overlooked short- and ultrashort-chain poly- and perfluorinated substances: a review[J]. Chemosphere, 2019, 220: 866-882. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.12.186
[8]	WANG Y, CHANG W, WANG L, et al. A review of sources, multimedia distribution and health risks of novel fluorinated alternatives[J]. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 2019, 182: 109402. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.109402
[9]	WANG S, HUANG J, YANG Y, et al. First report of a Chinese PFOS alternative overlooked for 30 years: its toxicity, persistence, and presence in the environment[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2013, 47(18): 10163-10170. doi: 10.1021/es401525n
[10]	LIN S, ALI M U, ZHENG C, et al. Toxic chemicals from uncontrolled e-waste recycling: exposure, body burden, health impact[J]. J Hazard Mater, 2022, 426: 127792. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127792
[11]	TANSEL B. PFAS use in electronic products and exposure risks during handling and processing of e-waste: a review[J]. J Environ Manage, 2022, 316: 115291. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115291
[12]	GARG S, KUMAR P, MISHRA V, et al. A review on the sources, occurrence and health risks of per-/poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) arising from the manufacture and disposal of electric and electronic products[J]. J Water Process Eng, 2020, 38: 101683. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101683
[13]	ZHANG B, HE Y, HUANG Y, et al. Novel and legacy poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in indoor dust from urban, industrial, and e-waste dismantling areas: the emergence of PFAS alternatives in China[J]. Environ Pollut, 2020, 263: 114461. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114461
[14]	PENG L, XU W, ZENG Q, et al. Exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances in waste recycling workers: distributions in paired human serum and urine[J]. Environ Int, 2022, 158: 106963. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106963
[15]	ZHANG T, ZHANG B, BAI X, et al. Health status of elderly people living near E-waste recycling sites: association of E-waste dismantling activities with legacy perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs)[J]. Environ Sci Technol Lett, 2019, 6(3): 133-140. doi: 10.1021/acs.estlett.9b00085
[16]	WU K, XU X, PENG L, et al. Association between maternal exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) from electronic waste recycling and neonatal health outcomes[J]. Environ Int, 2012, 48: 1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2012.06.018
[17]	ZHANG B, WEI Z, GU C, et al. First evidence of prenatal exposure to emerging poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances associated with E-waste dismantling: chemical structure-based placental transfer and health risks[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2022, 56(23): 17108-17118. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.2c05925
[18]	RAPPAZZO K M, COFFMAN E, HINES E P. Exposure to perfluorinated alkyl substances and health outcomes in children: a systematic review of the epidemiologic literature[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2017, 14(7): 691. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14070691
[19]	高雪嫣, 王雨昕, 李敬光, 等. 天津市孕妇全氟有机化合物的暴露水平[J]. 中国卫生工程学, 2019, 18(2): 166-170. GAO X Y, WANG Y X, LI J G, et al. Exposure of perfluoroalkyl substances in serum of pregnant women in Tianjin[J]. Chin J Public Health Eng, 2019, 18(2): 166-170.
[20]	SAGIV S K, RIFAS-SHIMAN S L, WEBSTER T F, et al. Sociodemographic and perinatal predictors of early pregnancy per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) concentrations[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2015, 49(19): 11849-11858. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.5b02489
[21]	KINGSLEY S L, ELIOT M N, KELSEY K T, et al. Variability and predictors of serum perfluoroalkyl substance concentrations during pregnancy and early childhood[J]. Environ Res, 2018, 165: 247-257. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.04.033
[22]	INOUE K, RITZ B, ANDERSEN S L, et al. Perfluoroalkyl substances and maternal thyroid hormones in early pregnancy; findings in the Danish national birth cohort[J]. Environ Health Perspect, 2019, 127(11): 117002. doi: 10.1289/EHP5482
[23]	ITOH S, ARAKI A, MIYASHITA C, et al. Association between perfluoroalkyl substance exposure and thyroid hormone/thyroid antibody levels in maternal and cord blood: the Hokkaido Study[J]. Environ Int, 2019, 133: 105139. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2019.105139
[24]	LIU J, LI J, LIU Y, et al. Comparison on gestation and lactation exposure of perfluorinated compounds for newborns[J]. Environ Int, 2011, 37(7): 1206-1212. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2011.05.001
[25]	ZHANG T, SUN H, QIN X, et al. PFOS and PFOA in paired urine and blood from general adults and pregnant women: assessment of urinary elimination[J]. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int, 2015, 22(7): 5572-5579. doi: 10.1007/s11356-014-3725-7
[26]	LI J, YAO J, XIA W, et al. Association between exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and blood glucose in pregnant women[J]. Int J Hyg Environ Health, 2020, 230: 113596. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2020.113596
[27]	中华人民共和国生态环境部. 重点管控新污染物清单(2023年版)[EB/OL]. [2023-12-22]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/gzk/gz/202212/t20221230_1009192.shtml. LTD E A by E. China issues 2023 list of key controlled new pollutants \| enviliance asia[EB/OL] [2024–07–05]. https://enviliance.com/regions/east-asia/cn/report_8936.
[28]	DU D, LU Y, ZHOU Y, et al. Perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in water along the entire coastal line of China: spatial distribution, mass loadings, and worldwide comparisons[J]. Environ Int, 2022, 169: 107506. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107506
[29]	HASHMI M Z, CHEN K, KHALID F, et al. Forty years studies on polychlorinated biphenyls pollution, food safety, health risk, and human health in an e-waste recycling area from Taizhou city, China: a review[J]. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 2022, 29(4): 4991-5005. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-17516-0
[30]	ZHAO L, CHENG Z, ZHU H, et al. Electronic-waste-associated pollution of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: environmental occurrence and human exposure[J]. J Hazard Mater, 2023, 451: 131204. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131204
[31]	HE Y, LV D, LI C, et al. Human exposure to F-53B in China and the evaluation of its potential toxicity: an overview[J]. Environ Int, 2022, 161: 107108. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107108
[32]	PAN Y, ZHU Y, ZHENG T, et al. Novel chlorinated polyfluorinated ether sulfonates and legacy per-/polyfluoroalkyl substances: placental transfer and relationship with serum albumin and glomerular filtration rate[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2017, 51(1): 634-644. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b04590
[33]	SHI Y, VESTERGREN R, XU L, et al. Human exposure and elimination kinetics of chlorinated polyfluoroalkyl ether sulfonic acids (Cl-PFESAs)[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2016, 50(5): 2396-2404. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.5b05849