Exposure to Bisphenol A and Bisphenol S and Incident Type 2 Diabetes: A Case-Cohort Study in the French Cohort D.E.S.I.R
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: The question of whether exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) contributes to the development of type 2 diabetes is still unresolved. Most epidemiological evidence on the association between BPA and diabetes is from cross-sectional studies or longitudinal studies with single urinary measurements. No prospective study has examined exposure to BPA analogs such as bisphenol S (BPS) in relation to incident type 2 diabetes.
Objectives: We aimed to investigate whether exposure to BPA and BPS, assessed at up to two time points, was associated with the incidence of type 2 diabetes.
Methods: We performed a case-cohort study on 755 participants without diabetes at baseline and followed-up over 9 y as part of the French prospective cohort Data from an Epidemiological Study on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome (D.E.S.I.R.). BPA-glucuronide (BPA-G) and BPS-glucuronide (BPS-G) were assessed in fasting spot urine samples collected during the health examinations at baseline and 3 y later. Associations with incident diabetes were examined using Prentice-weighted Cox regression models adjusted for potential confounders.
Results: A total of 201 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were diagnosed over the follow-up, including 30 in the subcohort. Compared with participants with the lowest average BPA exposure (below the first quartile), participants in the second, third, and fourth quartile groups of exposure had a near doubling of the risk of type 2 diabetes, with a hazard ratio 2.56 (95% CI: 1.16, 5.65), 2.35 (95% CI: 1.07, 5.15), and 1.56 (95% CI: 0.68, 3.55), respectively. The detection of BPS-G in urine at one or both time points was associated with incident diabetes, with an 2.81 (95% CI: 1.74, 4.53).
Discussion: This study shows positive associations between exposure to BPA and BPS and the incidence of type 2 diabetes, independent of traditional diabetes risk factors. Our results should be confirmed by recent, population-based observational studies in different populations and settings. Overall, these findings raise concerns about using BPS as a BPA substitute. Further research on BPA analogs is warranted. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5159.
Kaiglova A, Bardyova Z, Hockickova P, Zvolenska A, Melnikov K, Kucharikova S Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 26(5).
PMID: 40076635 PMC: 11900329. DOI: 10.3390/ijms26052013.
Acevedo J, Kahn L, Pierce K, Carrasco A, Singer Rosenberg M, Trasande L Environ Res. 2024; 264(Pt 1):120341.
PMID: 39522874 PMC: 11863187. DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2024.120341.
Feng B, Tang P, He S, Peng Z, Mo Y, Zhu L Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1439034.
PMID: 39484344 PMC: 11524935. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1439034.
Chen Y, Xu C, Huang Y, Liu Z, Zou J, Zhu H Nutrients. 2024; 16(19).
PMID: 39408220 PMC: 11478777. DOI: 10.3390/nu16193253.
He K, Chen R, Xu S, Ding Y, Wu Z, Bao M Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2024; 15:1422752.
PMID: 39211449 PMC: 11357934. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1422752.