| 1. |
- Pearce, Neil E, et al.
(författare)
-
IARC Monographs : 40 Years of Evaluating Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives. - : Environmental Health Perspectives. - 0091-6765 .- 1552-9924. ; 123:6, s. 507-514
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)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 the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that IARC Working Groups' failures 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 paper are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We have examined here criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. We review the history of IARC evaluations and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed.DISCUSSION: We conclude that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various discipline 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.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Hadkhale, K, et al.
(författare)
-
Occupational variation in incidence of bladder cancer: a comparison of population-representative cohorts from Nordic countries and Canada
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BMJ open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 7:8, s. e016538-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The objective of this study was to compare occupational variation of the risk of bladder cancer in the Nordic countries and Canada.MethodsIn the Nordic Occupational Cancer study (NOCCA), 73 653 bladder cancer cases were observed during follow-up of 141.6 million person-years. In the Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC), 8170 cases were observed during the follow-up of 36.7 million person-years. Standardised incidence ratios with 95% CI were estimated for 53 occupations in the NOCCA cohort and HR with 95% CIs were estimated for 42 occupations in the CanCHEC.ResultsElevated risks of bladder cancer were observed among hairdressers, printers, sales workers, plumbers, painters, miners and laundry workers. Teachers and agricultural workers had reduced risk of bladder cancer in both cohorts. Chimney-sweeps, tobacco workers and waiters had about 1.5-fold risk in the Nordic countries; no risk estimates for these categories were given from the CanCHEC cohort.ConclusionWe observed different occupational patterns in risk of bladder cancer in Nordic countries and Canada. The only occupation with similarly increased risk was observed among sales workers. Differences in smoking across occupational groups may explain some, but not all, of this variation.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Kjaerheim, K, et al.
(författare)
-
Variation in Nordic Work-Related Cancer Risks after Adjustment for Alcohol and Tobacco
- 2018
-
Ingår i: International journal of environmental research and public health. - : MDPI AG. - 1660-4601. ; 15:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Alcohol and tobacco strongly increases the risk of cancers of the tongue, mouth, pharynx, larynx, and oesophagus, and are also established risk factors for cancer of the liver, colon, and rectum. It is well documented that these habits are unequally distributed among occupational groups. Most occupational cohort studies lack information on these potentially important confounders, and may therefore be prone to bias. Aim: The aim of the study is to present Nordic standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for alcohol and tobacco related cancer by occupation, after adjustment for alcohol and tobacco, and to compare to the unadjusted SIRs. Material and Methods: The study is based on the Nordic Occupational Cancer (NOCCA) database. We used confirmatory factor analysis models for simultaneous analysis of the cancer sites related to alcohol and tobacco, to obtain factors that allow for computation of adjusted expected numbers from the reference rates. We then calculated adjusted SIRs for the relevant cancer sites for each occupation. Results: For some occupations and cancers, the changes of risk estimates were striking, from significantly high to significantly low and vice versa. Among Nordic farmers, unadjusted SIRs for cancer of the mouth and oesophagus were 0.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51–0.61) and 0.67 (CI 0.63–0.70), respectively. After adjustment, estimates changed to 1.10 (CI 1.01–1.21) and 1.16 (CI 1.10–1.22). Unadjusted SIR for pharynx cancer among wood workers was 0.83 (CI 0.75–0.91), adjusted SIR was 1.14 (CI 1.03–1.25). For larynx cancer, results in the opposite direction were seen: unadjusted SIR for economically inactive was 1.38 (CI 1.31–1.46) while the adjusted SIR was 0.91 (CI 0.86–0.96). Conclusions: Adjustment for the latent indicators of alcohol and tobacco consumption changed risk estimates for several occupations, gave a less confounded description of risk, and may guide in the identification of true risk factors.
|
|
