. 2023 May 3;131(5):057001. doi: 10.1289/EHP11814

Table 5.

Associations of plasma PFAS mixture and individual plasma PFAS concentrations with PCOS after controlling for other PFAS congeners based on quantile-based g-computation model, in women Shanghai, Shandong, and Zhejiang provinces, China ( $lowercase italic n equals 943$ ).

Items^a	All participants ( $lowercase italic n equals 943$ )^b		Normal-weight participants ( $lowercase italic n equals 622$ )^c		Overweight or obese participants ( $lowercase italic n equals 321$ )^c
Items^a	Weight^d	OR (95% CI)^e	Weight^d	OR (95% CI)^e	Weight^d	OR (95% CI)^e
PFAS mixture	—	1.20 (1.06, 1.37)	—	1.08 (0.92, 1.25)	—	1.28 (1.09, 1.42)
Legacy PFAS
PFOA	0.009	1.06 (0.85, 1.32)	0.006	1.05 (0.90, 1.24)	0.008	1.14 (0.87, 1.26)
PFNA	0.01	1.01 (0.81, 1.29)	0.01	1.09 (0.98, 1.30)	0.009	1.06 (0.75, 1.21)
PFDA	$negative 0.12$	0.96 (0.79, 1.20)	$negative 0.15$	0.95 (0.81, 1.19)	$negative 0.10$	0.95 (0.70, 1.07)
PFHpS	0.009	1.07 (0.95, 1.26)	0.06	1.04 (0.89, 1.21)	0.01	1.09 (0.89, 1.28)
PFDoA	0.19	1.18 (1.09, 1.31)	0.15	1.12 (0.94, 1.25)	0.21	1.21 (1.11, 1.35)
PFUnDA	0.08	1.05 (0.86, 1.27)	0.04	1.02 (0.86, 1.17)	0.05	1.08 (0.86, 1.20)
PFAS isomers
n-PFHxS	$negative 0.06$	0.84 (0.62, 1.08)	$negative 0.07$	0.82 (0.71, 1.14)	$negative 0.07$	0.87 (0.75, 1.16)
br-PFHxS	0.07	1.06 (0.92, 1.25)	0.006	1.06 (0.89, 1.22)	0.06	1.08 (0.92, 1.24)
n-PFOS	0.01	1.03 (0.82, 1.17)	0.01	1.08 (0.91, 1.26)	0.007	1.06 (0.91, 1.15)
$6 lowercase m-uppercase p f o s$	0.007	1.06 (0.92, 1.11)	0.005	1.00 (0.85, 1.09)	0.01	1.04 (0.82, 1.12)
$1 lowercase m-uppercase p f o s$	0.04	1.09 (0.97, 1.18)	0.02	1.04 (0.90, 1.16)	0.05	1.07 (0.94, 1.19)
$uppercase sigma 3,4,5 lowercase m-uppercase p f o s$	0.17	1.15 (1.04, 1.29)	0.11	1.10 (0.94, 1.25)	0.16	1.19 (1.06, 1.32)
PFAS alternatives
6:2 Cl-PFESA	0.22	1.19 (1.07, 1.34)	0.19	1.11 (0.98, 1.21)	0.20	1.22 (1.09, 1.37)
8:2 Cl-PFESA	0.07	1.04 (0.81, 1.26)	0.06	1.07 (0.87, 1.29)	0.09	1.09 (0.95, 1.26)
HFPO-DA	0.15	1.09 (1.02, 1.22)	0.14	1.07 (0.95, 1.19)	0.17	1.14 (1.05, 1.29)
Short-chain PFAS
PFBS	$negative 0.15$	0.97 (0.85, 1.10)	$negative 0.17$	0.95 (0.83, 1.10)	$negative 0.15$	0.97 (0.86, 1.12).
PFBA	$negative 0.22$	0.85 (0.67, 1.06)	$negative 0.20$	0.84 (0.70, 1.05)	$negative 0.22$	0.84 (0.66, 1.03)
PFPeS	0.002	1.06 (0.84, 1.24)	0.007	1.09 (0.94, 1.26)	0.005	1.07 (0.96, 1.21)
PFPeA	0.005	1.01 (0.79, 1.19)	0.001	1.07 (0.91, 1.22)	0.007	1.06 (0.91, 1.17)
PFHxA	0.06	1.15 (0.98, 1.27)	0.12	1.02 (0.90, 1.18)	0.15	1.12 (1.04, 1.26)
PFHpA	0.007	1.02 (0.89, 1.22)	0.006	1.01 (0.85, 1.16)	0.02	1.09 (0.95, 1.32)

Note: Overweight/obesity was defined by BMI $greater than or equal to 24 kilograms per meter squared$ . —, Not applicable; BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; PCOS, polycystic ovarian syndrome; PFAS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

^{^a}

For full chemical names see Table 1.

^{^b}

Quantile-based g-computation model adjusting for age (linear), BMI (categorical), annual household income (categorical), educational level (categorical), study site (categorical), age at menarche (linear), and menstrual volume (categorical).

^{^c}

Quantile-based g-computation model adjusting for age (linear), annual household income (categorical), educational level (categorical), study site (categorical), age at menarche (linear), and menstrual volume (categorical).

^{^d}

Weights indicated the contribution of individual PFAS in the associations between PFAS mixture with PCOS.

^{^e}

Quantile-based g-computation models were carried out to assess the OR and 95% CI of PCOS, which were estimated by 1-standard deviation higher difference in quartiles of ln-transformed PFAS and PFAS mixture.