Systematic review is an approach to answering research questions by systematically selecting, evaluating, and integrating scientific evidence.
Evidence that BPA might be harmful to human health due to its actions as an endocrine-disrupting chemical has prompted the industry to seek alternative chemicals.
This analysis summarizes in vivo and in vitro literature and compare the hormonal potency of BPS and BPF to BPA using the in vitro studies.
Abstract
Background
Increasing concern over bisphenol A (BPA) as an endocrine-disrupting chemical and its possible effects on human health have prompted the removal of BPA from consumer products, often labeled “BPA-free.” Some of the chemical replacements, however, are also bisphenols and may have similar physiological effects in organisms. Bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF) are two such BPA substitutes.
Objectives
This review was carried out to evaluate the physiological effects and endocrine activities of the BPA substitutes BPS and BPF. Further, we compared the hormonal potency of BPS and BPF to that of BPA.
Methods
We conducted a systematic review based on the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) protocol.
Results
We identified the body of literature to date, consisting of 32 studies (25 in vitro only, and 7 in vivo). The majority of these studies examined the hormonal activities of BPS and BPF and found their potency to be in the same order of magnitude and of similar action as BPA (estrogenic, antiestrogenic, androgenic, and antiandrogenic) in vitro and in vivo. BPS also has potencies similar to that of estradiol in membrane-mediated pathways, which are important for cellular actions such as proliferation, differentiation, and death. BPS and BPF also showed other effects in vitro and in vivo, such as altered organ weights, reproductive end points, and enzyme expression.
Conclusions
Based on the current literature, BPS and BPF are as hormonally active as BPA, and they have endocrine-disrupting effects.