Cancer
Scientists urge action on plastic additives linked to sperm decline
Scientists have warned that chemicals in plastics are driving falling sperm counts, after talks on a global pollution treaty collapsed over disputes about chemical regulation.
Last week, after nearly two weeks of negotiations, delegates left Geneva on Friday without agreement, after oil- and gas-producing nations objected to production limits and chemical curbs.
Almost 100 nations signed a declaration calling for a “legally binding obligation to phase out those most harmful plastic products and chemicals of concern”.
But both texts drafted by Luis Vayas Valdivieso, chair of the negotiating committee, omitted any reference to chemical controls.
Global sperm counts have dropped by about one per cent each year for 50 years, with fertility declining at similar rates, studies show.
Obesity, sedentary lifestyles and ageing populations have been cited as possible causes, but reproductive health experts say environmental factors are most significant.
Dr Shanna Swan, professor of environmental medicine and public health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City, said the decline was “largely, but not entirely due to toxins in the environment that have the ability to interfere with steroid hormones”.
In 2017, Swan and colleagues published a meta-analysis showing sperm counts had fallen by nearly 60 per cent among men in North America, Europe and Australia between 1973 and 2011.
When they repeated the research in 2023, extending the period to 2018 and adding data from Africa, Asia and South America, the findings were even more shocking.
Swan said: “We separated the countries into western and non-western for analytic purposes, and in both we found a significant decline.
“And the other thing that we found, which was at least as alarming, was that if you looked at all of the studies going back to 1973 you see a one per cent per year decline.
“But if you look at studies published after 2000, you see an over two per cent decline.
“So the rate of decline had increased, and had increased significantly in recent years.”
The warning comes after a report published two weeks ago by Deep Science Ventures, reviewed by Swan, described chemical pollution as “a threat of a similar order as climate change”, though it receives far less attention.
Falling sperm rates since around 1950 correlate with rising plastics use. Swan highlighted strong evidence linking common plastic additives to reduced sperm counts.
Swan explained: “Phthalates are chemicals that are put into plastic to give it flexibility and make it soft and flexible.
“So any time you pick up a soft water bottle or tubing, like medical tubing, or a food container that’s soft, you’re going to be touching phthalates.
“Then, on the other side, the evil twin of phthalates are the bisphenols.
“While phthalates make plastic soft and flexible, bisphenols make it hard and inflexible. And phthalates lower testosterone and the bisphenols increase oestrogen.”
These endocrine-disrupting chemicals – substances that disturb hormone systems – particularly affect foetuses and embryos developing in the womb.
Swan had previously studied the effects of phthalates on unborn male babies, finding that exposure at critical points in pregnancy could cause subtle deformities in sexual development.
The adverse effects, known as “phthalate syndrome”, included smaller penises, a shorter distance between the genitals and anus, and, later in life, lower sperm counts at sexual maturity.
“We showed the link between the exposure and fertility,” Swan said.
“And when you see that total sperm count going down worldwide, what I believe is you’re seeing an important effect of early exposure to these chemicals.”
Swan would not be drawn into commenting on the treaty talks under way in Geneva, but said urgent action was needed on plastic additives and safer replacements.
She said: “In the meantime, yes people can be careful,.
“They can reuse materials. They should try to look at what they use in their takeout containers and carry little glass bottles around to get their drinks.
“It’s very important. But it’s not solving a bigger problem, which is how do we make these things that we have become dependent on in a safer way?”
A new ovarian cancer drug has been approved for NHS use in England, offering hundreds of women with hard-to-treat disease a life-prolonging treatment.
Elahere is the first new drug for chemotherapy-resistant ovarian cancer to be approved by the NHS for more than 20 years.
Ovarian cancer is the 18th most common type of cancer globally, affecting more than 300,000 women a year.
More than three-quarters of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, making the disease harder to treat.
Prof Ruth Plummer, national clinical lead for cancer drugs at NHS England, said: “This represents the most significant breakthrough in NHS treatment for these hard-to-treat ovarian cancers in over two decades – and we’re delighted it will now offer hundreds of women much-needed hope of precious extra time with their loved ones.”
Standard treatment for ovarian cancer usually involves surgery and chemotherapy, but about 80 per cent of patients with advanced disease relapse and most eventually develop resistance to chemotherapy.
According to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, patients with folate receptor-alpha-positive platinum-resistant epithelial cancers have until now had limited options when their tumours stop responding to standard chemotherapy.
Now NICE has approved mirvetuximab soravtansine, also known as Elahere, for patients with epithelial ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer that has become resistant to platinum-based chemotherapy and whose tumours contain the FRα protein that the drug targets.
FRα is a protein found on the surface of some cancer cells.
NHS England said up to 400 women a year in England could benefit, in what it described as a major milestone for treatment.
Mirvetuximab soravtansine is given through a drip once every three weeks.
A global clinical trial involving eight NHS hospitals found that the treatment delayed cancer progression and prolonged survival by an average of four months, compared with chemotherapy alone, with more manageable side-effects.
Cancer progression means the disease is growing, spreading or worsening.
In 37 per cent of patients, tumours shrank by at least 30 per cent, compared with 16 per cent of those given chemotherapy.
The drug, made by AbbVie, combines a “homing” antibody, which seeks out the FRα protein on the surface of cancer cells, with a cancer-killing molecule that destroys the cell from within.
Experts said the decision was a seminal moment and could significantly improve the quality of life of affected patients.
Rachel Downing, head of policy and external affairs at Target Ovarian Cancer, said: “This is a hugely important moment for women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer and their families, who have faced limited effective treatment options for far too long. Today’s announcement offers real hope of improved quality of life.”
Victoria Clare, chief executive of the charity Ovacome, said: “Today marks a landmark moment. Being told that platinum-based chemotherapy is no longer working can bring anxiety and uncertainty, particularly when the disease is at an advanced stage, where time and options are limited.
“This recommendation is the first in over 20 years to offer the ovarian cancer community an additional choice at a critical stage, with the potential to make a real difference to patients and their families.”
Helen Knight, director of medicines evaluation at NICE, said: “We heard clearly from patients and clinicians about the very limited options available at this stage of the disease and the substantial burden that chemotherapy places on women’s lives.
“We are pleased that, following a robust process and a new commercial arrangement with AbbVie, we are now able to recommend this treatment for NHS use.”
AI may help speed breast cancer diagnosis for high-risk women after abnormal mammograms, a study suggests.
Women with abnormal mammograms often wait weeks to learn whether they have breast cancer.
Researchers at UC San Francisco and UC Berkeley said an AI-guided workflow could help reduce that wait by quickly identifying those most likely to have the disease. Some women could move from imaging to evaluation, and sometimes biopsy, in a single day.
Dr Maggie Chung, first author of the study, said: “This is a really an exciting time.
“This moves us closer to personalised care, where we can tailor a plan so that each patient gets the right intervention at the right time.”
The study used an open-source AI model called Mirai.
The model was trained on hundreds of thousands of mammograms linked to patients’ cancer outcomes.
A mammogram is an X-ray scan of the breast used to look for signs of cancer. A biopsy involves taking a small tissue sample to test for disease.
The AI tool is designed to detect subtle patterns in screening mammograms and predict a woman’s cancer risk.
Researchers at UC San Francisco and UC Berkeley applied the model to more than 4,100 screening mammograms at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center.
Mirai identified 525 women, about 12.7 per cent of screened patients, as high risk.
Those patients could receive an interpretation of their mammograms immediately after the scan and have additional diagnostic imaging for suspicious areas on the same day.
Some women who needed biopsies were also able to have them on the same day.
The researchers said Mirai reduced the wait time for diagnostic evaluation from several weeks to about an hour.
For women who were ultimately diagnosed with breast cancer, it reduced the average wait for biopsy from more than two months to fewer than 10 days.
The researchers stressed that Mirai does not replace radiologists or make diagnoses on its own.
Instead, it acts as a triage tool to help physicians identify the patients who can benefit most from accelerated care.
The team analysed more than 114,000 archival mammograms before launching the programme, to ensure the model would capture enough high-risk patients without overloading the clinic with too many expedited evaluations.
The researchers said they hope AI will support a more personalised approach to breast cancer screening tailored to each patient’s breast cancer risk.
Chung said: “Right now, many women follow the same screening schedule but their individual risk can be very different.
“AI risk assessment gives us the chance to identify the women most likely to benefit from expedited care and get them what they need.”
Adam Yala, senior author of the study and a data scientist at UC Berkeley, said: “This is a powerful example of how AI can be a collaborative partner for physicians.
“It shows how we can improve care when we bring clinicians and data scientists together to design these systems.”
A genomic test may help some women with breast cancer avoid chemotherapy, with near-identical outcomes in an international trial.
The findings suggest patients with a low test score could be treated with hormone therapy alone without increasing the risk of their cancer returning.
Researchers said the results could support more personalised treatment decisions and spare some women the side-effects of chemotherapy.
Prof Rob Stein, the trial’s chief investigator and a professor of breast oncology at UCL, said: “Optima addresses a longstanding challenge in breast cancer care: identifying who truly benefits from chemotherapy and who does not.
“Our findings show that many patients can safely avoid chemotherapy without compromising their outcomes.
“These results mark an important and significant step toward more personalised treatment.
“The trial has successfully used tumour biology to guide decisions rather than relying solely on traditional clinical features.”
Breast cancer treatment usually involves surgery to remove tumours. Chemotherapy is then often recommended if doctors believe there is a risk the disease will return.
Chemotherapy can cause side-effects including hair loss, rashes, nausea, insomnia and fatigue. Some women may also face longer-term consequences such as infertility, cognitive impairment or early menopause.
The Optima trial followed more than 4,000 patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer in the UK, Norway, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand and Thailand.
The trial was led by University College London.
One woman who took part in the trial told the Guardian that being able to skip chemotherapy felt “like Christmas”. Nine years after being diagnosed, taking the test and skipping chemotherapy, she is healthy and enjoying a full and active life.
The trial tested whether a genomic test could identify which patients need chemotherapy and which could safely avoid it.
The Prosigna test, made by diagnostics company Veracyte, analyses the activity of 50 genes in tumour tissue. It identifies the molecular subtype of the cancer and gives a score estimating the risk of breast cancer returning in the next 10 years.
The randomised trial involved 4,429 patients aged 40 or over with hormone-positive breast cancer. Hormone-positive breast cancer grows in response to hormones such as oestrogen or progesterone. It is the most common form of breast cancer, accounting for up to 80 per cent of cases globally.
Participants were assigned to one of two groups. In the standard treatment group, patients received chemotherapy followed by hormone therapy.
In the second group, patients had their tumours analysed using the genomic test. Those with a high score received chemotherapy and hormone therapy. Those with a low score received hormone therapy alone.
Radiotherapy and other treatments were given as usual in both groups.
In the second group, outcomes were very similar whether chemotherapy was given or not. Five years after treatment, 95 per cent of patients who had chemotherapy and hormone therapy were alive and free from breast cancer recurrence, while 94 per cent of those who skipped chemotherapy were also alive and recurrence-free.
The findings suggest chemotherapy offered little or no additional benefit for patients with low test scores.
Some men also took part in the study, but researchers said there were too few to draw firm conclusions for this group.
The trial received funding from the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Veracyte and cancer charities.
Prof Iain MacPherson, a co-chief investigator and professor of breast oncology at the University of Glasgow, said: “Optima provides robust, practice-changing evidence that we can safely reduce the use of chemotherapy for many patients with hormone-sensitive breast cancer.
“These findings represent a major step forward in delivering more personalised, precise care, ensuring that treatment decisions are driven by what will genuinely improve outcomes for patients, while avoiding unnecessary toxicity.
“The potential impact for both patients and health services is substantial.”
Menopause2 weeks agoPerimenopause misinformation ‘putting women at risk’
News4 weeks agoNIH Grant terminations disproportionately impact minority scientists, research finds
Hormonal health3 weeks agoPCOS renamed after decade-long campaign to end ‘cyst’ misconception
Hormonal health2 weeks agoNHS urged to update website following renaming of PCOS
Adolescent health4 weeks agoWUKA brings Period-Positive Pool Party to London Aquatics Centre to keep girls swimming through puberty
Menopause4 weeks agoCBT shows promise for menopause insomnia and hot flashes
Entrepreneur1 week agoWomen’s Health Innovation Summit opens submissions for 2026 Innovation Showcase
Diagnosis4 weeks agoArtera receives FDA Clearance for breast cancer platform
6 Comments