Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Abstract: Many clinical features of lung cancer are different in women and men. Sex steroid hormones exert effects in nonreproductive organs, such as the lungs. The association between menstrual and childbearing factors and the risk of lung cancer among women is still debated. We performed a pooled analysis of eight studies contributing to the International Lung Cancer Consortium (4,386 cases and 4,177 controls). Pooled associations between menstrual or reproductive factors and lung cancer were estimated using multivariable unconditional logistic regression. Subgroup analyses were done for menopause status, smoking habits and histology. We found no strong support for an association of age at menarche and at menopause with lung cancer, but peri/postmenopausal women were at higher risk compared to premenopausal (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.11-1.93). Premenopausal women showed increased risks associated with parity (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.03-2.93) and number of children (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.21-6.93 for more than 3 children; p for trend 0.01) and decreased with breastfeeding (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30-0.98). In contrast, peri/postmenopausal subjects had ORs around unity for the same exposures. No major effect modification was exerted by smoking status or cancer histology. Menstrual and reproductive factors may play a role in the genesis of lung cancer, yet the mechanisms are unclear, and smoking remains the most important modifiable risk factor. More investigations in large well-designed studies are needed to confirm these findings and to clarify the underlying mechanisms of gender differences in lung cancer risk.
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 28440542
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Keywords: brain ; EXPOSURE ; LONG-TERM ; POPULATION ; RISK ; meningioma ; HEALTH ; NUMBER ; COUNTRIES ; HEAD ; case-control study ; GLIOMA ; methods ; pooled analysis ; INCREASED RISK ; CANCER-RISK ; INTERNATIONAL CASE-CONTROL ; brain tumours ; CORDLESS TELEPHONES ; mobile phones ; SELECTION BIAS ; PHONE USE ; CELLULAR TELEPHONES ; NONDIFFERENTIAL MISCLASSIFICATION ; radiofrequency fields
    Abstract: Methods An interview-based case-control study with 2708 glioma and 2409 meningioma cases and matched controls was conducted in 13 countries using a common protocol. Results A reduced odds ratio (OR) related to ever having been a regular mobile phone user was seen for glioma [OR 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.94] and meningioma (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.68-0.91), possibly reflecting participation bias or other methodological limitations. No elevated OR was observed 〉= 10 years after first phone use (glioma: OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.76-1.26; meningioma: OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.61-1.14). ORs were 〈 1.0 for all deciles of lifetime number of phone calls and nine deciles of cumulative call time. In the 10th decile of recalled cumulative call time, 〉= 1640 h, the OR was 1.40 (95% CI 1.03-1.89) for glioma, and 1.15 (95% CI 0.81-1.62) for meningioma; but there are implausible values of reported use in this group. ORs for glioma tended to be greater in the temporal lobe than in other lobes of the brain, but the CIs around the lobe-specific estimates were wide. ORs for glioma tended to be greater in subjects who reported usual phone use on the same side of the head as their tumour than on the opposite side. Conclusions Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with use of mobile phones. There were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma at the highest exposure levels, but biases and error prevent a causal interpretation. The possible effects of long-term heavy use of mobile phones require further investigation
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 20483835
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Keywords: PROGRAM ; PUBLIC-HEALTH ; POLICY ; ADHERENCE ; PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING SCIENCE ; EPIDEMIOLOGIC ENTERPRISE ; CANCER-EPIDEMIOLOGY ; PLEA ; FALSE ; RECIPE
    Abstract: BACKGROUND: Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans. OBJECTIVES: The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed. DISCUSSION: We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed. CONCLUSIONS: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public's health.
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 25712798
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Keywords: ENVIRONMENT ; CANCER ; AGENTS ; evaluation ; human ; INFORMATION ; VOLUME ; EPIDEMIOLOGY ; occupation ; RISK ; RISKS ; SITE ; SITES ; CARCINOGENESIS ; FORM ; TARGET ; HEALTH ; etiology ; cancer risk ; US ; CARCINOGENS ; CANCER RISKS ; INDIVIDUALS ; ORGANIZATION ; AGENT ; review ; INDUSTRY ; HUMAN CANCER ; CARCINOGEN ; ENVIRONMENTS
    Abstract: The occupational environment has been a most fruitful one for investigating the etiology of human cancer. Many recognized human carcinogens are occupational carcinogens. There is a large volume of epidemiologic and experimental data concerning cancer risks in different work environments. It is important to synthesize this information for both scientific and public health purposes. Various organizations and individuals have published lists of occupational carcinogens. However, such lists have been limited by unclear criteria for which recognized carcinogens should be considered occupational carcinogens, and by inconsistent and incomplete information on the occupations and industries in which the carcinogenic substances may be found and on their target sites of cancer. Based largely on the evaluations published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, and augmented with additional information, the present article represents an attempt to summarize, in tabular form, current knowledge on occupational carcinogens, the occupations and industries in which they are found, and their target organs. We have considered 28 agents as definite occupational carcinogens, 27 agents as probable occupational carcinogens, and 113 agents as possible occupational carcinogens. These tables should be useful for regulatory or preventive purposes and for scientific purposes in research priority setting and in understanding carcinogenesis
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 15531427
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Abstract: BACKGROUND: Occupational exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields (ELF) is a suspected risk factor for brain tumors, however the literature is inconsistent. Few studies have assessed whether ELF in different time windows of exposure may be associated with specific histologic types of brain tumors. This study examines the association between ELF and brain tumors in the large-scale INTEROCC study. METHODS: Cases of adult primary glioma and meningioma were recruited in seven countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom) between 2000 and 2004. Estimates of mean workday ELF exposure based on a job exposure matrix were assigned. Estimates of cumulative exposure, average exposure, maximum exposure, and exposure duration were calculated for the lifetime, and 1 to 4, 5 to 9, and 10+ years before the diagnosis/reference date. RESULTS: There were 3,761 included brain tumor cases (1,939 glioma and 1,822 meningioma) and 5,404 population controls. There was no association between lifetime cumulative ELF exposure and glioma or meningioma risk. However, there were positive associations between cumulative ELF 1 to 4 years before the diagnosis/reference date and glioma [odds ratio (OR) 〉/= 90th percentile vs. 〈 25th percentile, 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.36-2.07; PLinear trend 〈 0.0001], and, somewhat weaker associations with meningioma (OR 〉/= 90th percentile vs. 〈 25th percentile, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.97-1.57; PLinear trend = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Results showed positive associations between ELF in the recent past and glioma. IMPACT: Occupational ELF exposure may play a role in the later stages (promotion and progression) of brain tumorigenesis.
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 24935666
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Keywords: CANCER ; Germany ; COMMON ; INFORMATION ; EXPOSURE ; HISTORY ; POPULATION ; RISK ; RISKS ; meningioma ; TISSUE ; IMPACT ; RISK-FACTORS ; TISSUES ; tumour ; FREQUENCY ; FIELD ; FREQUENCIES ; HEALTH ; DESIGN ; NUMBER ; risk factors ; COUNTRIES ; SWEDEN ; FRANCE ; NETHERLANDS ; case-control studies ; study design ; AUSTRALIA ; FINLAND ; case control study ; case-control study ; RE ; BRAIN-TUMORS ; INCREASE ; GLIOMA ; RECALL ; GLAND ; case control studies ; methods ; CELLULAR-TELEPHONE USE ; RISK-FACTOR ; CANCER-RISK ; E ; carcinogenic ; INCREASES ; case control ; acoustic neuroma ; brain tumours ; mobile phone ; MOBILE PHONE USE ; SETUP ; acoustic neurinoma ; benign tumours ; case-control ; CORDLESS TELEPHONES ; FIELDS ; mobile phones ; parotid gland tumours ; SELECTION BIAS
    Abstract: The very rapid worldwide increase in mobile phone use in the last decade has generated considerable interest in the possible health effects of exposure to radio frequency (RF) fields. A multinational case-control study, INTERPHONE, was set-up to investigate whether mobile phone use increases the risk of cancer and, more specifically, whether the RF fields emitted by mobile phones are carcinogenic. The study focused on tumours arising in the tissues most exposed to RF fields from mobile phones: glioma, meningioma, acoustic neurinoma and parotid gland tumours. In addition to a detailed history of mobile phone use, information was collected on a number of known and potential risk factors for these tumours. The study was conducted in 13 countries. Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the UK using a common core protocol. This paper describes the study design and methods and the main characteristics of the study population. INTERPHONE is the largest case-control study to date investigating risks related to mobile phone use and to other potential risk factors for the tumours of interest and includes 2,765 glioma, 2,425 meningioma, 1,121 acoustic neurinoma, 109 malignant parotid gland tumour cases and 7,658 controls. Particular attention was paid to estimating the amount and direction of potential recall and participation biases and their impact on the study results
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 17636416
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    Keywords: brain ; Germany ; EXPOSURE ; POPULATION ; RISK ; HEALTH ; case-control studies ; CENTERS ; SELECTION ; brain neoplasms ; PREVALENCE ; INSIGHTS ; case-control study ; BRAIN-TUMORS ; GLIOMA ; epidemiological methods ; acoustic neuroma ; SELECTION BIAS ; INTERPHONE-STUDY-GROUP ; BRAIN-TUMOR ; RESPONSE RATES ; Cellular Phones ; Refusal to Participate ; REPORTING PARTICIPATION
    Abstract: PURPOSE: To quantitatively assess the impact of selection bias caused by nonparticipation in a multinational case-control study of mobile phone use and brain tumor. METHODS: Non-response questionnaires (NRQ) were completed by a sub-set of nonparticipants. Selection bias factors were calculated based on the prevalence of mobile phone use reported by nonparticipants with NRQ data, and on scenarios of hypothetical exposure prevalence for other nonparticipants. RESULTS: Regular mobile phone use was reported less frequently by controls and cases who completed the NRQ (controls, 56%; cases, 50%) than by those who completed the full interview (controls, 69%; cases, 66%). This relationship was consistent across study centers, sex, and age groups. Lower education and more recent start of mobile phone use were associated with refusal to participate. Bias factors varied between 0.87 and 0.92 in the most plausible scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Refusal to participate in brain tumor case-control studies seems to be related to less prevalent use of mobile phones, and this could result in a downward bias of around 10% in odds ratios for regular mobile phone use. The use of simple selection bias estimation methods in case-control studies can give important insights into the extent of any bias, even when nonparticipant information is incomplete
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 19064187
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    Keywords: CANCER ; human ; CLASSIFICATION ; LUNG-CANCER ; EPIDEMIOLOGY ; POPULATION ; MECHANISM ; CARCINOGENESIS ; BREAST-CANCER ; HUMANS ; OXIDATIVE STRESS ; NESTED CASE-CONTROL ; OCCUPATIONAL-EXPOSURE ; CARCINOGEN ; RISK-ASSESSMENT ; animal ; occupational ; IARC ; mechanisms of carcinogenicity ; PARTICLE SURFACE-AREA ; POLYCHLORINATED-BIPHENYLS PCBS ; REFRACTORY CERAMIC FIBER ; TITANIUM-DIOXIDE
    Abstract: OBJECTIVES: There are some common occupational agents and exposure circumstances for which evidence of carcinogenicity is substantial but not yet conclusive for humans. Our objectives were to identify research gaps and needs for 20 agents prioritized for review based on evidence of widespread human exposures and potential carcinogenicity in animals or humans. DATA SOURCES: For each chemical agent (or category of agents), a systematic review was conducted of new data published since the most recent pertinent International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monograph meeting on that agent. DATA EXTRACTION: Reviewers were charged with identifying data gaps and general and specific approaches to address them, focusing on research that would be important in resolving classification uncertainties. An expert meeting brought reviewers together to discuss each agent and the identified data gaps and approaches. DATA SYNTHESIS: Several overarching issues were identified that pertained to multiple agents; these included the importance of recognizing that carcinogenic agents can act through multiple toxicity pathways and mechanisms, including epigenetic mechanisms, oxidative stress, and immuno- and hormonal modulation. CONCLUSIONS: Studies in occupational populations provide important opportunities to understand the mechanisms through which exogenous agents cause cancer and intervene to prevent human exposure and/or prevent or detect cancer among those already exposed. Scientific developments are likely to increase the challenges and complexities of carcinogen testing and evaluation in the future, and epidemiologic studies will be particularly critical to inform carcinogen classification and risk assessment processes
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 20562050
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    Keywords: CANCER ; EPIDEMIOLOGY ; EXPOSURE ; RISK ; RISKS ; HEALTH ; BRAIN-TUMORS ; RECALL ; brain tumour ; vestibular schwannoma ; CANCER-RISK ; acoustic neuroma ; CORDLESS TELEPHONES ; mobile phones ; SELECTION BIAS ; PHONE USE ; CELLULAR TELEPHONES ; LOUD NOISE ; Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields
    Abstract: Background: The rapid increase in mobile telephone use has generated concern about possible health risks of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from these devices. Methods: A case-control study of 1105 patients with newly diagnosed acoustic neuroma (vestibular schwannoma) and 2145 controls was conducted in 13 countries using a common protocol. Past mobile phone use was assessed by personal interview. In the primary analysis, exposure time was censored at one year before the reference date (date of diagnosis for cases and date of diagnosis of the matched case for controls); analyses censoring exposure at five years before the reference date were also done to allow for a possible longer latent period. Results: The odds ratio (OR) of acoustic neuroma with ever having been a regular mobile phone user was 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.69-1.04). The OR for 〉= 10 years after first regular mobile phone use was 0.76 (0.52-1.11). There was no trend of increasing ORs with increasing cumulative call time or cumulative number of calls, with the lowest OR (0.48 (0.30-0.78)) observed in the 9th decile of cumulative call time. In the 10th decile (〉= 1640 h) of cumulative call time, the OR was 1.32 (0.88-1.97); there were, however, implausible values of reported use in those with 〉= 1640 h of accumulated mobile phone use. With censoring at 5 years before the reference date the OR for 〉= 10 years after first regular mobile phone use was 0.83 (0.58-1.19) and for 〉= 1640 h of cumulative call time it was 2.79(1.51-5.16). but again with no trend in the lower nine deciles and with the lowest OR in the 9th decile. In general, ORs were not greater in subjects who reported usual phone use on the same side of the head as their tumour than in those who reported it on the opposite side, but it was greater in those in the 10th decile of cumulative hours of use. Conclusions: There was no increase in risk of acoustic neuroma with ever regular use of a mobile phone or for users who began regular use 10 years or more before the reference date. Elevated odds ratios observed at the highest level of cumulative call time could be due to chance, reporting bias or a causal effect. As acoustic neuroma is usually a slowly growing tumour, the interval between introduction of mobile phones and occurrence of the tumour might have been too short to observe an effect, if there is one.
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 21862434
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    Keywords: CANCER ; EPIDEMIOLOGY ; CARCINOGENS ; CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM ; GLIOMAS ; MATRIX ; CHILDHOOD ; FARMERS ; CHEMICALS ; ADULT BRAIN-TUMORS
    Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between occupational exposure to selected organic solvents and meningioma. METHODOLOGY: A multicentre case-control study conducted in seven countries, including 1906 cases and 5565 controls. Occupational exposure to selected classes of organic solvents (aliphatic and alicyclic hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated hydrocarbons and 'other' organic solvents) or seven specific solvents (benzene, toluene, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethylene, methylene chloride and gasoline) was assessed using lifetime occupational histories and a modified version of the FINJEM job-exposure matrix (INTEROCC-JEM). Study participants were classified as 'exposed' when they had worked in an occupation for at least 1 year, with a 5-year lag, in which the estimated prevalence of exposure was 25% or greater in the INTEROCC-JEM. Associations between meningioma and each of the solvent exposures were estimated using conditional logistic regression, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 6.5% of study participants were ever exposed to 'any' solvent, with a somewhat greater proportion of controls (7%) ever exposed compared with cases (5%), but only one case was ever exposed to any chlorinated hydrocarbon (1,1,1-trichloroethane). No association was observed between any of the organic solvents and meningioma, in either men or women, and no dose-response relationships were observed in internal analyses using either exposure duration or cumulative exposure. DISCUSSION: We found no evidence that occupational exposure to these organic solvents is associated with meningioma.
    Type of Publication: Journal article published
    PubMed ID: 24474387
    Signatur Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...