The Australian Work Exposures Study: Prevalence of Occupational Exposure to Formaldehyde

INTRODUCTION: The aims of this study were to produce a population-based estimate of the prevalence of work-related exposure to formaldehyde, to identify the main circumstances of exposure and to describe the use of workplace control measures designed to decrease those exposures. METHODS: The analysis used data from the Australian Workplace Exposures Study, a nationwide telephone survey, which investigated the current prevalence and exposure circumstances of work-related exposure to 38 known or suspected carcinogens, including formaldehyde, among Australian workers aged 18-65 years. Using the web-based tool OccIDEAS, semi-quantitative information was collected about exposures in the current job held by the respondent. Questions were addressed primarily at tasks undertaken rather than about self-reported exposures. RESULTS: Of the 4993 included respondents, 124 (2.5%) were identified as probably being exposed to formaldehyde in the course of their work [extrapolated to 2.6% of the Australian working population-265 000 (95% confidence interval 221 000-316 000) workers]. Most (87.1%) were male. About half worked in technical and trades occupations. In terms of industry, about half worked in the construction industry. The main circumstances of exposure were working with particle board or plywood typically through carpentry work, building maintenance, or sanding prior to painting; with the more common of other exposures circumstances being firefighters involved in fighting fires, fire overhaul, and clean-up or back-burning; and health workers using formaldehyde when sterilizing equipment or in a pathology laboratory setting. The use of control measures was inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Workers are exposed to formaldehyde in many different occupational circumstances. Information on the exposure circumstances can be used to support decisions on appropriate priorities for intervention and control of occupational exposure to formaldehyde, and estimates of burden of cancer arising from occupational exposure to formaldehyde

Cancer Pharmacogenomics and Pharmacoepidemiology: Setting a Research Agenda to Accelerate Translation

Recent advances in genomic research have demonstrated a substantial role for genomic factors in predicting response to cancer therapies. Researchers in the fields of cancer pharmacogenomics and pharmacoepidemiology seek to understand why individuals respond differently to drug therapy, in terms of both adverse effects and treatment efficacy. To identify research priorities as well as the resources and infrastructure needed to advance these fields, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop titled “Cancer Pharmacogenomics: Setting a Research Agenda to Accelerate Translation” on July 21, 2009, in Bethesda, MD. In this commentary, we summarize and discuss five science-based recommendations and four infrastructure-based recommendations that were identified as a result of discussions held during this workshop. Key recommendations include 1) supporting the routine collection of germline and tumor biospecimens in NCI-sponsored clinical trials and in some observational and population-based studies; 2) incorporating pharmacogenomic markers into clinical trials; 3) addressing the ethical, legal, social, and biospecimen- and data-sharing implications of pharmacogenomic and pharmacoepidemiologic research; and 4) establishing partnerships across NCI, with other federal agencies, and with industry. Together, these recommendations will facilitate the discovery and validation of clinical, sociodemographic, lifestyle, and genomic markers related to cancer treatment response and adverse events, and they will improve both the speed and efficiency by which new pharmacogenomic and pharmacoepidemiologic information is translated into clinical practice

Breast Cancer Incidence Among American Indian and Alaska Native Women: US, 1999–2004

BACKGROUND. Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) women. Although published studies have suggested that breast cancer rates among AI/AN women are lower than those among other racial and ethnic populations, accurate determinations of the breast cancer burden have been hampered by misclassification of AI/AN race. METHODS. Cancer incidence data from the National Program of Cancer Registries and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program were combined to estimate age-adjusted rates for the diagnosis years 1999 through 2004. Several steps were taken to reduce the misclassification of AI/AN race: linking cases to Indian Health Service (IHS) patient services database, restricting analyses to Contract Health Service Delivery Area counties, and stratifying results by IHS region. RESULTS. Breast cancer incidence rates among AI/AN women varied nearly 3- fold across IHS regions. The highest rates were in Alaska (134.8) and the Plains (Northern, 115.9; Southern, 115.7), and the lowest rates were in the Southwest (50.8). The rate in Alaska was similar to the rate among non-Hispanic white (NHW) women in Alaska. Overall, AI/AN women had lower rates of breast cancer than NHW women, but AI/AN women were more likely to be diagnosed with late-stage disease. CONCLUSIONS. To the authors’ knowledge, this report provides the most comprehensive breast cancer incidence data for AI/AN women to date. The wide regional variation indicates an important need for etiologic and health services research, and the large percentage of AI/AN women with late-stage disease demands innovative approaches for increasing access to screening

Age-standardized incidence and mortality rates of oral and pharyngeal cancer in Puerto Rico and among Non-Hispanics Whites, Non-Hispanic Blacks, and Hispanics in the USA

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the American region, Puerto Rico (PR) has the highest incidence of oral and pharyngeal cancer (OPC), but racial/ethnic differences have never been assessed and compared with other groups in the United States of America (USA). We compared the age-adjusted incidence and mortality rates of OPC between PR and among USA Hispanics (USH), Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW), and Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHB) to assess the burden of this cancer in PR.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Analysis of the age-standardized rates (per 100,000) was performed using the direct method with the world standard population (ASR(World)) from 1998–2002. Annual percent change (APC) and Relative Risks (RR) were calculated using the Poisson regression model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The incidence ASR(World) for men in PR was constant (APC ≈ 0.0%), in contrast, a decrease was observed among NHW, NHB, and USH men, although only USH showed statistical significance (APC = -4.9%, p < 0.05). In women, the highest increase in incidence (APC = 5.3%) and the lowest decrease in mortality (APC = -1.4%) was observed in PR. The ratio of the ASR(World) showed that in all racial/ethnic groups, men had approximately 2–4 fold increased incidence and mortality risk of OPC than women (p < 0.05). Men in PR had a higher mortality risk (p < 0.05) of OPC as compared to USH, NHW, and NHB; but among women, PR showed a significant excess of mortality only as compared to USH (est. SRR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.41, 2.33).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The overall higher incidence of OPC in men in PR as compared to USH, NHB, and NHW could be explained by the effect of gene-environment interactions. Meanwhile, the higher mortality from OPC in PR suggests limitations in the health-care access within this population. Further research is warranted to elucidate these findings.</p

Disparities in breast cancer survival in the United States (2001-2009): Findings from the CONCORD-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Reducing breast cancer incidence and achieving equity in breast cancer outcomes remains a priority for public health practitioners, health care providers, policy makers, and health advocates. Monitoring breast cancer survival can help evaluate the effectiveness of health services, quantify inequities in outcomes between states or population subgroups, and inform efforts to improve the effectiveness of cancer management and treatment. METHODS: We analyzed breast cancer survival using individual patient records from 37 statewide registries that participated in the CONCORD-2 study, covering approximately 80% of the US population. Females were diagnosed between 2001 and 2009 and were followed through December 31, 2009. Age-standardized net survival at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years after diagnosis was estimated by state, race (white, black), stage at diagnosis, and calendar period (2001-2003 and 2004-2009). RESULTS: Overall, 5-year breast cancer net survival was very high (88.2%). Survival remained remarkably high from 2001 through 2009. Between 2001 and 2003, survival was 89.1% for white females and 76.9% for black females. Between 2004 and 2009, survival was 89.6% for white females and 78.4% for black females. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer survival was more than 10 percentage points lower for black females than for white females, and this difference persisted over time. Reducing racial disparities in survival remains a challenge that requires broad, coordinated efforts at the federal, state, and local levels. Monitoring trends in breast cancer survival can highlight populations in need of improved cancer management and treatment. Cancer 2017;123:5100-18. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA