Ren Xiaohan, Zhang Tongtong, Chen Xinglin, Wei Xiyi, Tian Ye, Li Guangyao, Zhang Xu, Zhang Wei, You Zebing, Wang Shangqian, Qin Chao
The State Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China.
Aging (Albany NY). 2020 Sep 30;12(18):18099-18126. doi: 10.18632/aging.103620.
We performed this meta-analysis to elucidate the associations between early-life BPA exposure and reproductive-related outcome indicators. The standardized mean differences (SMDs) and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were measured by fixed-effects or random-effects models. The results revealed that BPA exposure at extremely-high dose (>50mg/kg/day) was significantly associated with negative reproductive-related outcomes (Prostate weight: SMD: -4.21; 95% Cl: -5.97, -2.44; Testis weight: SMD: -1.92; 95% Cl: -2.61, -1.23; Epididymis weight: SMD: -2.16; 95% Cl: -3.47, -0.86; Daily sperm production; SMD: -1.90; 95% Cl: -3.27, -0.53; Epididymal sperm count; SMD: -3.42; 95% Cl: -3.87, -2.97). Meanwhile, regardless of the dose, early-life BPA exposure could result in an adverse effect on sperm parameters of F1 generation male rodents at any period. Also, we found the non-monotonic dose response curves of BPA in specific tissues or organs, which may challenge the traditional mindset of "safe dose". This study demonstrated that bisphenol A exposure was relevant to adverse reproductive-related outcomes at specially appointed dose and period of life. Yet the assumption that no adverse effects can occur below the "safe" dose is suspected.
我们进行了这项荟萃分析，以阐明生命早期双酚A暴露与生殖相关结局指标之间的关联。采用固定效应或随机效应模型测量标准化均数差（SMD）及其95%置信区间（CI）。结果显示，极高剂量（>50mg/kg/天）的双酚A暴露与负面生殖相关结局显著相关（前列腺重量：SMD：-4.21；95%CI：-5.97，-2.44；睾丸重量：SMD：-1.92；95%CI：-2.61，-1.23；附睾重量：SMD：-2.16；95%CI：-3.47，-0.86；每日精子生成量：SMD：-1.90；95%CI：-3.27，-0.53；附睾精子计数：SMD：-3.42；95%CI：-3.87，-2.97）。同时，无论剂量如何，生命早期双酚A暴露在任何时期都可能对F1代雄性啮齿动物的精子参数产生不利影响。此外，我们发现双酚A在特定组织或器官中的剂量反应曲线呈非单调变化，这可能会挑战“安全剂量”的传统观念。本研究表明，双酚A暴露在特定的剂量和生命时期与负面生殖相关结局有关。然而，“安全”剂量以下不会产生不利影响这一假设受到了质疑。
