Translational toxicology in setting occupational exposure limits for dusts and hazard classification – a critical evaluation of a recent approach to translate dust overload findings from rats to humans

Background We analyze the scientific basis and methodology used by the German MAK Commission in their recommendations for exposure limits and carcinogen classification of “granular biopersistent particles without known specific toxicity” (GBS). These recommendations are under review at the European Union level. We examine the scientific assumptions in an attempt to reproduce the results. MAK’s human equivalent concentrations (HECs) are based on a particle mass and on a volumetric model in which results from rat inhalation studies are translated to derive occupational exposure limits (OELs) and a carcinogen classification. Methods We followed the methods as proposed by the MAK Commission and Pauluhn 2011. We also examined key assumptions in the metrics, such as surface area of the human lung, deposition fractions of inhaled dusts, human clearance rates; and risk of lung cancer among workers, presumed to have some potential for lung overload, the physiological condition in rats associated with an increase in lung cancer risk. Results The MAK recommendations on exposure limits for GBS have numerous incorrect assumptions that adversely affect the final results. The procedures to derive the respirable occupational exposure limit (OEL) could not be reproduced, a finding raising considerable scientific uncertainty about the reliability of the recommendations. Moreover, the scientific basis of using the rat model is confounded by the fact that rats and humans show different cellular responses to inhaled particles as demonstrated by bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) studies in both species. Conclusion Classifying all GBS as carcinogenic to humans based on rat inhalation studies in which lung overload leads to chronic inflammation and cancer is inappropriate. Studies of workers, who have been exposed to relevant levels of dust, have not indicated an increase in lung cancer risk. Using the methods proposed by the MAK, we were unable to reproduce the OEL for GBS recommended by the Commission, but identified substantial errors in the models. Considerable shortcomings in the use of lung surface area, clearance rates, deposition fractions; as well as using the mass and volumetric metrics as opposed to the particle surface area metric limit the scientific reliability of the proposed GBS OEL and carcinogen classification.International Carbon Black Associatio

The impact of excluding or including Death Certificate Initiated (DCI) cases on estimated cancer survival: A simulation study

Background Population-based cancer registries strive to cover all cancer cases diagnosed within the population, but some cases will always be missed and no register is 100 % complete. Many cancer registries use death certificates to identify additional cases not captured through other routine sources, to hopefully add a large proportion of the missed cases. Cases notified through this route, who would not have been captured without death certificate information, are referred to as Death Certificate Initiated (DCI) cases. Inclusion of DCI cases in cancer registries increases completeness and is important for estimating cancer incidence. However, inclusion of DCI cases will generally lead to biased estimates of cancer survival, but the same is often also true if excluding DCI cases. Missed cases are probably not a random sample of all cancer cases, but rather cases with poor prognosis. Further, DCI cases have poorer prognosis than missed cases in general, since they have all died with cancer mentioned on the death certificates. Methods We performed a simulation study to estimate the impact of including or excluding DCI cases on cancer survival estimates, under different scenarios. Results We demonstrated that including DCI cases underestimates survival. The exclusion of DCI cases gives unbiased survival estimates if missed cases are a random sample of all cancer cases, while survival is overestimated if these have poorer prognosis. Conclusion In our most extreme scenarios, with 25 % of cases initially missed, the usual practice of including DCI cases underestimated 5-year survival by at most 3 percentage points

Exploring the impact of cancer registry completeness on international cancer survival differences: a simulation study

Background Data from population-based cancer registries are often used to compare cancer survival between countries or regions. The ICBP SURVMARK-2 study is an international partnership aiming to quantify and explore the reasons behind survival differences across high-income countries. However, the magnitude and relevance of differences in cancer survival between countries have been questioned, as it is argued that observed survival variations may be explained, at least in part, by differences in cancer registration practice, completeness and the availability and quality of the respective data sources. Methods As part of the ICBP SURVMARK-2 study, we used a simulation approach to better understand how differences in completeness, the characteristics of those missed and inclusion of cases found from death certificates can impact on cancer survival estimates. Results Bias in 1- and 5-year net survival estimates for 216 simulated scenarios is presented. Out of the investigated factors, the proportion of cases not registered through sources other than death certificates, had the largest impact on survival estimates. Conclusion Our results show that the differences in registration practice between participating countries could in our most extreme scenarios explain only a part of the largest observed differences in cancer survival

International variation in oesophageal and gastric cancer survival 2012–2014: differences by histological subtype and stage at diagnosis (an ICBP SURVMARK-2 population-based study)

Objective To provide the first international comparison of oesophageal and gastric cancer survival by stage at diagnosis and histological subtype across high-income countries with similar access to healthcare. Methods As part of the ICBP SURVMARK-2 project, data from 28 923 patients with oesophageal cancer and 25 946 patients with gastric cancer diagnosed during 2012–2014 from 14 cancer registries in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK) were included. 1-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival were estimated by stage at diagnosis, histological subtype (oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)) and country. Results Oesophageal cancer survival was highest in Ireland and lowest in Canada at 1 (50.3% vs 41.3%, respectively) and 3 years (27.0% vs 19.2%) postdiagnosis. Survival from gastric cancer was highest in Australia and lowest in the UK, for both 1-year (55.2% vs 44.8%, respectively) and 3-year survival (33.7% vs 22.3%). Most patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer had regional or distant disease, with proportions ranging between 56% and 90% across countries. Stage-specific analyses showed that variation between countries was greatest for localised disease, where survival ranged between 66.6% in Australia and 83.2% in the UK for oesophageal cancer and between 75.5% in Australia and 94.3% in New Zealand for gastric cancer at 1-year postdiagnosis. While survival for OAC was generally higher than that for OSCC, disparities across countries were similar for both histological subtypes. Conclusion Survival from oesophageal and gastric cancer varies across high-income countries including within stage groups, particularly for localised disease. Disparities can partly be explained by earlier diagnosis resulting in more favourable stage distributions, and distributions of histological subtypes of oesophageal cancer across countries. Yet, differences in treatment, and also in cancer registration practice and the use of different staging methods and systems, across countries may have impacted the comparisons. While primary prevention remains key, advancements in early detection research are promising and will likely allow for additional risk stratification and survival improvements in the future

Progress in cancer survival, mortality, and incidence in seven high-income countries 1995–2014 (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study

© 2019 World Health Organization Background: Population-based cancer survival estimates provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of cancer services and can reflect the prospects of cure. As part of the second phase of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP), the Cancer Survival in High-Income Countries (SURVMARK-2) project aims to provide a comprehensive overview of cancer survival across seven high-income countries and a comparative assessment of corresponding incidence and mortality trends. Methods: In this longitudinal, population-based study, we collected patient-level data on 3·9 million patients with cancer from population-based cancer registries in 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK) for seven sites of cancer (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, pancreas, lung, and ovary) diagnosed between 1995 and 2014, and followed up until Dec 31, 2015. We calculated age-standardised net survival at 1 year and 5 years after diagnosis by site, age group, and period of diagnosis. We mapped changes in incidence and mortality to changes in survival to assess progress in cancer control. Findings: In 19 eligible jurisdictions, 3 764 543 cases of cancer were eligible for inclusion in the study. In the 19 included jurisdictions, over 1995–2014, 1-year and 5-year net survival increased in each country across almost all cancer types, with, for example, 5-year rectal cancer survival increasing more than 13 percentage points in Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. For 2010–14, survival was generally higher in Australia, Canada, and Norway than in New Zealand, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Over the study period, larger survival improvements were observed for patients younger than 75 years at diagnosis than those aged 75 years and older, and notably for cancers with a poor prognosis (ie, oesophagus, stomach, pancreas, and lung). Progress in cancer control (ie, increased survival, decreased mortality and incidence) over the study period was evident for stomach, colon, lung (in males), and ovarian cancer. Interpretation: The joint evaluation of trends in incidence, mortality, and survival indicated progress in four of the seven studied cancers. Cancer survival continues to increase across high-income countries; however, international disparities persist. While truly valid comparisons require differences in registration practice, classification, and coding to be minimal, stage of disease at diagnosis, timely access to effective treatment, and the extent of comorbidity are likely the main determinants of patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to assess the impact of these factors to further our understanding of international disparities in cancer survival. Funding: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Institute New South Wales; Cancer Research UK; Danish Cancer Society; National Cancer Registry Ireland; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; National Health Service England; Norwegian Cancer Society; Public Health Agency Northern Ireland, on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; The Scottish Government; Western Australia Department of Health; and Wales Cancer Network

Lung cancer risk in never-smokers: a population-based case-control study of epidemiologic risk factors

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We conducted a case-control study in the greater Toronto area to evaluate potential lung cancer risk factors including environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure, family history of cancer, indoor air pollution, workplace exposures and history of previous respiratory diseases with special consideration given to never smokers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>445 cases (35% of which were never smokers oversampled by design) between the ages of 20-84 were identified through four major tertiary care hospitals in metropolitan Toronto between 1997 and 2002 and were frequency matched on sex and ethnicity with 425 population controls and 523 hospital controls. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the associations between exposures and lung cancer risk.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Any previous exposure to occupational exposures (OR total population 1.6, 95% CI 1.4-2.1, OR never smokers 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.3), a previous diagnosis of emphysema in the total population (OR 4.8, 95% CI 2.0-11.1) or a first degree family member with a previous cancer diagnosis before age 50 among never smokers (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.0-3.2) were associated with increased lung cancer risk.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Occupational exposures and family history of cancer with young onset were important risk factors among never smokers.</p

Determinants of baseline seroreactivity to human papillomavirus type 16 in the Ludwig-McGill cohort study

Background: Immunity plays an important role in controlling human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and associated lesions. Unlike infections caused by other viruses, natural HPV infection does not always result in a protective antibody response. Therefore, HPV antibodies are also considered markers of cumulative exposure. The aim of this study was to identify determinants of HPV16 seroreactivity at enrollment among women from the Ludwig-McGill cohort, a natural history study of HPV infection and risk of cervical neoplasia.Methods: HPV16 serology was assessed by ELISA for L1 and L2 capsid antigens, while HPV typing and viral load measurements were performed by PCR-based methods. The associations were analyzed by unconditional logistic regression.Results: Of 2049 subjects, 425 (20.7%) were strongly seropositive for HPV16. In multivariate analysis, seroreactivity was positively correlated with age, lifetime number of sexual partners, frequency of sex, and HPV16 viral load, and negatively associated with duration of smoking.Conclusions: HPV16 seroreactivity is determined by factors that reflect viral exposure.Ludwig Institute for Cancer ResearchU.S. National Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLudwig Inst Canc Res, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Fed Fluminense, Dept Immunobiol, Niteroi, RJ, BrazilBrazilian Natl Canc Inst, Program Cellular Biol, Rio De Janeiro, BrazilMcGill Univ, Dept Oncol, Montreal, PQ, CanadaUniv Estadual Paulista, Inst Biosci, Dept Microbiol & Immunol, Botucatu, SP, BrazilInst Gynaecol Canc Res, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Montreal, CHUM, Div Gynecol Oncol, Montreal, PQ, CanadaMcGill Univ, Dept Epidemiol Biostat & Occupat Hlth, Montreal, PQ, CanadaICESP, Sao Paulo Canc Inst, Mol Biol Lab, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Sao Paulo, Sch Med, Dept Radiol & Oncol, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Sao Paulo, Sch Med, Sao Paulo, BrazilSanta Casa Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Estadual Paulista, Inst Biosci, Dept Microbiol & Immunol, Botucatu, SP, BrazilU.S. National Cancer InstituteCA70269Canadian Institutes of Health Research49396Canadian Institutes of Health Research8332

Previous Lung Diseases and Lung Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In order to review the epidemiologic evidence concerning previous lung diseases as risk factors for lung cancer, a meta-analysis and systematic review was conducted.Relevant studies were identified through MEDLINE searches. Using random effects models, summary effects of specific previous conditions were evaluated separately and combined. Stratified analyses were conducted based on smoking status, gender, control sources and continent.A previous history of COPD, chronic bronchitis or emphysema conferred relative risks (RR) of 2.22 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.66, 2.97) (from 16 studies), 1.52 (95% CI: 1.25, 1.84) (from 23 studies) and 2.04 (95% CI: 1.72, 2.41) (from 20 studies), respectively, and for all these diseases combined 1.80 (95% CI: 1.60, 2.11) (from 39 studies). The RR of lung cancer for subjects with a previous history of pneumonia was 1.43 (95% CI: 1.22-1.68) (from 22 studies) and for subjects with a previous history of tuberculosis was 1.76 (95% CI=1.49, 2.08), (from 30 studies). Effects were attenuated when restricting analysis to never smokers only for COPD/emphysema/chronic bronchitis (RR=1.22, 0.97-1.53), however remained significant for pneumonia 1.36 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.69) (from 8 studies) and tuberculosis 1.90 (95% CI: 1.45, 2.50) (from 11 studies).Previous lung diseases are associated with an increased risk of lung cancer with the evidence among never smokers supporting a direct relationship between previous lung diseases and lung cancer

Multi-center feasibility study evaluating recruitment, variability in risk factors and biomarkers for a diet and cancer cohort in India

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>India's population exhibits diverse dietary habits and chronic disease patterns. Nutritional epidemiologic studies in India are primarily of cross-sectional or case-control design and subject to biases, including differential recall of past diet. The aim of this feasibility study was to evaluate whether a diet-focused cohort study of cancer could be established in India, providing insight into potentially unique diet and lifestyle exposures.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Field staff contacted 7,064 households within three regions of India (New Delhi, Mumbai, and Trivandrum) and found 4,671 eligible adults aged 35-69 years. Participants completed interviewer-administered questionnaires (demographic, diet history, physical activity, medical/reproductive history, tobacco/alcohol use, and occupational history), and staff collected biological samples (blood, urine, and toenail clippings), anthropometric measurements (weight, standing and sitting height; waist, hip, and thigh circumference; triceps, sub-scapula and supra-patella skin fold), and blood pressure measurements.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eighty-eight percent of eligible subjects completed all questionnaires and 67% provided biological samples. Unique protein sources by region were fish in Trivandrum, dairy in New Delhi, and pulses (legumes) in Mumbai. Consumption of meat, alcohol, fast food, and soft drinks was scarce in all three regions. A large percentage of the participants were centrally obese and had elevated blood glucose levels. New Delhi participants were also the least physically active and had elevated lipids levels, suggesting a high prevalence of metabolic syndrome.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A high percentage of participants complied with study procedures including biological sample collection. Epidemiologic expertise and sufficient infrastructure exists at these three sites in India to successfully carry out a modest sized population-based study; however, we identified some potential problems in conducting a cohort study, such as limited number of facilities to handle biological samples.</p

High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) screening and detection in healthy patient saliva samples: a pilot study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The human papillomaviruses (HPV) are a large family of non-enveloped DNA viruses, mainly associated with cervical cancers. Recent epidemiologic evidence has suggested that HPV may be an independent risk factor for oropharyngeal cancers. Evidence now suggests HPV may modulate the malignancy process in some tobacco- and alcohol-induced oropharynx tumors, but might also be the primary oncogenic factor for inducing carcinogenesis among some non-smokers. More evidence, however, is needed regarding oral HPV prevalence among healthy adults to estimate risk. The goal of this study was to perform an HPV screening of normal healthy adults to assess oral HPV prevalence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Healthy adult patients at a US dental school were selected to participate in this pilot study. DNA was isolated from saliva samples and screened for high-risk HPV strains HPV16 and HPV18 and further processed using qPCR for quantification and to confirm analytical sensitivity and specificity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Chi-square analysis revealed the patient sample was representative of the general clinic population with respect to gender, race and age (<it>p </it>< 0.05). Four patient samples were found to harbor HPV16 DNA, representing 2.6% of the total (n = 151). Three of the four HPV16-positive samples were from patients under 65 years of age and all four were female and Hispanic (non-White). No samples tested positive for HPV18.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The successful recruitment and screening of healthy adult patients revealed HPV16, but not HPV18, was present in a small subset. These results provide new information about oral HPV status, which may help to contextualize results from other studies that demonstrate oral cancer rates have risen in the US among both females and minorities and in some geographic areas that are not solely explained by rates of tobacco and alcohol use. The results of this study may be of significant value to further our understanding of oral health and disease risk, as well as to help design future studies exploring the role of other factors that influence oral HPV exposure, as well as the short- and long-term consequences of oral HPV infection.</p