| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- 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.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Bonde, Jens Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Work at night and breast cancer - report on evidence-based options for preventive actions
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health. - : Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health. - 0355-3140 .- 1795-990X. ; 38:4, s. 380-390
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified shift work involving circadian disruption as probably carcinogenic to humans (group 2A), primarily based on experimental and epidemiologic evidence for breast cancer. In order to examine options for evidence-based preventive actions, 16 researchers in basic, epidemiological and applied sciences convened at a workshop in Copenhagen 26-27 October 2011. This paper summarizes the evidence from epidemiological and experimental studies and presents possible recommendations for prevention of the effects of night work on breast cancer. Among those studies that quantified duration of shift work, there were statistically significant elevations in risk only after about 20 years working night shift. It is unclear from these studies whether or not there is a modest but real elevated risk for shorter durations. Hence, restriction of the total number of years working night shift could be one future preventive recommendation for shift workers. The diurnal secretion of melatonin by the pineal gland with peak in secretory activity during the night is a good biochemical marker of the circadian rhythm. Disruption of the diurnal melatonin secretion pattern can be diminished by restricting the number of consecutive night shifts. Reddish light and reduced light intensity during work at night could potentially help diminish the inhibitory activity of light with strong intensity on the melatonin secretion, but further mechanistic insight is needed before definite recommendations can be made. Earlier or more intensive mammography screening among female night shift worker is not recommended because the harm benefit ratio in this age group may not be beneficial. Preventive effects of melatonin supplementation on breast cancer risk have not been clearly documented, but may be a promising avenue if a lack of side effects can be shown even after long-term ingestion. Women with previous or current breast cancer should be advised not to work night shifts because of strong experimental evidence demonstrating accelerated tumor growth by suppression of melatonin secretion. Work during the night is widespread worldwide. To provide additional evidence-based recommendations on prevention of diseases related to night shift work, large studies on the impact of various shift schedules and type of light on circadian rhythms need to be conducted in real work environments.
|
|
| 8. |
- Dittrich, Christian, et al.
(författare)
-
ESMO / ASCO Recommendations for a Global Curriculum in Medical Oncology Edition 2016
- 2016
-
Ingår i: ESMO Open. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7029. ; 1:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) are publishing a new edition of the ESMO/ ASCO Global Curriculum (GC) thanks to contribution of 64 ESMOappointed and 32 ASCO-appointed authors. First published in 2004 and updated in 2010, the GC edition 2016 answers to the need for updated recommendations for the training of physicians in medical oncology by defining the standard to be fulfilled to qualify as medical oncologists. At times of internationalisation of healthcare and increased mobility of patients and physicians, the GC aims to provide state-of-the-art cancer care to all patients wherever they live. Recent progress in the field of cancer research has indeed resulted in diagnostic and therapeutic innovations such as targeted therapies as a standard therapeutic approach or personalised cancer medicine specialised training for medical oncology trainees. Thus, several new chapters on technical contents such as molecular pathology, translational research or molecular imaging and on conceptual attitudes towards human principles like genetic counselling or survivorship have been integrated in the GC. The GC edition 2016 consists of 12 sections with 17 subsections, 44 chapters and 35 subchapters, respectively. Besides renewal in its contents, the GC underwent a principal formal change taking into consideration modern didactic principles. It is presented in a template-based format that subcategorises the detailed outcome requirements into learning objectives, awareness, knowledge and skills. Consecutive steps will be those of harmonising and implementing teaching and assessment strategies.
|
|
| 9. |
- Hoedlmoser, S, et al.
(författare)
-
Sex Differences in Kidney Transplantation: Austria and the United States, 1978-2018
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in medicine. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 2296-858X. ; 8, s. 800933-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Systematic analyses about sex differences in wait-listing and kidney transplantation after dialysis initiation are scarce. We aimed at identifying sex-specific disparities along the path of kidney disease treatment, comparing two countries with distinctive health care systems, the US and Austria, over time.MethodsWe analyzed subjects who initiated dialysis from 1979–2018, in observational cohort studies from the US and Austria. We used Cox regression to model male-to-female cause-specific hazard ratios (csHRs, 95% confidence intervals) for transitions along the consecutive states dialysis initiation, wait-listing, kidney transplantation and death, adjusted for age and stratified by country and decade of dialysis initiation.ResultsAmong 3,053,206 US and 36,608 Austrian patients starting dialysis, men had higher chances to enter the wait-list, which however decreased over time [male-to-female csHRs for wait-listing, 1978–1987: US 1.94 (1.71, 2.20), AUT 1.61 (1.20, 2.17); 2008–2018: US 1.35 (1.32, 1.38), AUT 1.11 (0.94, 1.32)]. Once wait-listed, the advantage of the men became smaller, but persisted in the US [male-to-female csHR for transplantation after wait-listing, 2008–2018: 1.08 (1.05, 1.11)]. The greatest disparity between men and women occurred in older age groups in both countries [male-to-female csHR for wait-listing after dialysis, adjusted to 75% age quantile, 2008–2018: US 1.83 (1.74, 1.92), AUT 1.48 (1.02, 2.13)]. Male-to-female csHRs for death were close to one, but higher after transplantation than after dialysis.ConclusionsWe found evidence for sex disparities in both countries. Historically, men in the US and Austria had 90%, respectively, 60% higher chances of being wait-listed for kidney transplantation, although these gaps decreased over time. Efforts should be continued to render kidney transplantation equally accessible for both sexes, especially for older women.
|
|
