| 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. |
- Kanate, Abraham S., et al.
(författare)
-
Reduced-intensity transplantation for lymphomas using haploidentical related donors vs HLA-matched unrelated donors
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Blood. - : American Society of Hematology. - 0006-4971 .- 1528-0020. ; 127:7, s. 938-947
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We evaluated 917 adult lymphoma patients who received haploidentical (n = 185) or HLA-matched unrelated donor (URD) transplantation either with (n = 241) or without antithymocyte globulin (ATG; n = 491) following reduced-intensity conditioning regimens. Haploidentical recipients received posttransplant cyclophosphamide-based graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, whereas URD recipients received calcineurin inhibitor-based prophylaxis. Median follow-up of survivors was 3 years. The 100-day cumulative incidence of grade III-IV acute GVHD on univariate analysis was 8%, 12%, and 17% in the haploidentical, URD without ATG, and URD with ATG groups, respectively (P = .44). Corresponding 1-year rates of chronic GVHD on univariate analysis were 13%, 51%, and 33%, respectively (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, grade III-IV acute GVHD was higher in URD without ATG (P = .001), as well as URD with ATG (P = .01), relative to haploidentical transplants. Similarly, relative to haploidentical transplants, risk of chronic GVHD was higher in URD without ATG and URD with ATG (P < .0001). Cumulative incidence of relapse/progression at 3 years was 36%, 28%, and 36% in the haploidentical, URD without ATG, and URD with ATG groups, respectively (P = .07). Corresponding 3-year overall survival (OS) was 60%, 62%, and 50% in the 3 groups, respectively, with multivariate analysis showing no survival difference between URD without ATG (P = .21) or URD with ATG (P = .16), relative to haploidentical transplants. Multivariate analysis showed no difference between the 3 groups in terms of nonrelapse mortality (NRM), relapse/progression, and progression-free survival (PFS). These data suggest that reduced-intensity conditioning haploidentical transplantation with posttransplant cyclophosphamide does not compromise early survival outcomes compared with matched URD transplantation, and is associated with significantly reduced risk of chronic GVHD.
|
|
