Epidemiological science and cancer control

Epidemiological methods are essential for the discovery of cancer risks and prognostic factors as well as for the evaluation of cancer prevention measures. In this review, we discuss epidemiological surveillance procedures for data collection and processing to guide and evaluate the consequences of anticancer efforts for populations, assess the identification of cancer risk factors, examine barriers to cancer screening and recommended rules for early diagnosis programs. Epidemiological studies have shown that hindrances to cancer information assessment are currently encountered in developing countries. Known cancer risk factors include social determinants, lifestyle factors, occupational exposures, infectious agents, and genetic and epigenetic alterations. Challenges remain in studying the effectiveness of cancer screening; screening can have detrimental effects, and few cancers clearly benefit from screening. Currently, epidemiology faces the challenge of dealing with distinct levels of data, including factors related to social status, lifestyle and genetics, to reconstruct the causal traits of cancer. Additionally, translating epidemiological knowledge into cancer control demands more implementation studies in the population

Effect of HPV on head and neck cancer patient survival, by region and tumor site: A comparison of 1362 cases across three continents

Objectives: To explore whether HPV-related biomarkers predict oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) survival similarly across different global regions, and to explore their prognostic utility among non-oropharyngeal (non-OP) head and neck cancers. Methods: Data from 1362 head and neck SCC (HNSCC) diagnosed 2002–2011 was used from epidemiologic studies in: Brazil (GENCAPO study, n = 388), U.S. (CHANCE study, n = 472), and Europe (ARCAGE study, n = 502). Tumors were centrally tested for p16INK4a and HPV16 DNA (by PCR). Risk of mortality was examined using Cox proportional hazard models. Results: There were 517 OPSCC and 845 non-OP HNSCC. Cases were primarily male (81%), ever smokers (91%), with median age of 58 years and median follow-up of 3.1 years (IQR = 1.4–5.9). Among OPSCC, the risk of mortality was significantly lower among 184 HPV-related (i.e., p16+/HPV16+) compared to 333 HPV-unrelated (p16- and/or HPV16-) cases (HR = 0.25, 95%CI = 0.18–0.34). Mortality was reduced among HPV-related OPSCC cases from the U.S., Europe, and Brazil (each p ⩽ 0.01) and after adjustment, remained significantly reduced (aHR = 0.34, 95%CI = 0.24–0.49). Among non-OP HNSCC, neither p16 (aHR = 0.83, 95%CI = 0.60–1.14), HPV16 DNA (aHR = 1.20, 95%CI = 0.89–1.63), or p16+/HPV16+ (aHR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.32–1.08) was a significantly predictor of mortality. When interaction was tested, the effect of HPV16/p16 was significantly different in OPSCC than non-OP HNSCC (p-interaction = 0.02). Conclusion: HPV-related OPSCCs had similar survival benefits across these three regions. Prognostic utility of HPV among non-OP HNSCC is limited so tumor HPV/p16 testing should not be routinely done among non-OP HNSCC

Investigating the effect of sexual behaviour on oropharyngeal cancer risk:a methodological assessment of Mendelian randomization

BACKGROUND: Human papilloma virus infection is known to influence oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) risk, likely via sexual transmission. However, sexual behaviour has been correlated with other risk factors including smoking and alcohol, meaning independent effects are difficult to establish. We aimed to evaluate the causal effect of sexual behaviour on the risk of OPC using Mendelian randomization (MR). METHODS: Genetic variants robustly associated with age at first sex (AFS) and the number of sexual partners (NSP) were used to perform both univariable and multivariable MR analyses with summary data on 2641 OPC cases and 6585 controls, obtained from the largest available genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Given the potential for genetic pleiotropy, we performed a number of sensitivity analyses: (i) MR methods to account for horizontal pleiotropy, (ii) MR of sexual behaviours on positive (cervical cancer and seropositivity for Chlamydia trachomatis) and negative control outcomes (lung and oral cancer), (iii) Causal Analysis Using Summary Effect estimates (CAUSE), to account for correlated and uncorrelated horizontal pleiotropic effects, (iv) multivariable MR analysis to account for the effects of smoking, alcohol, risk tolerance and educational attainment. RESULTS: In univariable MR, we found evidence supportive of an effect of both later AFS (IVW OR = 0.4, 95%CI (0.3, 0.7), per standard deviation (SD), p = < 0.001) and increasing NSP (IVW OR = 2.2, 95%CI (1.3, 3.8) per SD, p = < 0.001) on OPC risk. These effects were largely robust to sensitivity analyses accounting for horizontal pleiotropy. However, negative control analysis suggested potential violation of the core MR assumptions and subsequent CAUSE analysis implicated pleiotropy of the genetic instruments used to proxy sexual behaviours. Finally, there was some attenuation of the univariable MR results in the multivariable models (AFS IVW OR = 0.7, 95%CI (0.4, 1.2), p = 0.21; NSP IVW OR = 0.9, 95%CI (0.5 1.7), p = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Despite using genetic variants strongly related sexual behaviour traits in large-scale GWAS, we found evidence for correlated pleiotropy. This emphasizes a need for multivariable approaches and the triangulation of evidence when performing MR of complex behavioural traits. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-022-02233-3

Alcohol drinking and head and neck cancer risk: the joint effect of intensity and duration

Background: Alcohol is a well-established risk factor for head and neck cancer (HNC). This study aims to explore the effect of alcohol intensity and duration, as joint continuous exposures, on HNC risk. Methods: Data from 26 case-control studies in the INHANCE Consortium were used, including never and current drinkers who drunk ≤10 drinks/day for ≤54 years (24234 controls, 4085 oral cavity, 3359 oropharyngeal, 983 hypopharyngeal and 3340 laryngeal cancers). The dose-response relationship between the risk and the joint exposure to drinking intensity and duration was investigated through bivariate regression spline models, adjusting for potential confounders, including tobacco smoking. Results: For all subsites, cancer risk steeply increased with increasing drinks/day, with no appreciable threshold effect at lower intensities. For each intensity level, the risk of oral cavity, hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancers did not vary according to years of drinking, suggesting no effect of duration. For oropharyngeal cancer, the risk increased with durations up to 28 years, flattening thereafter. The risk peaked at the higher levels of intensity and duration for all subsites (odds ratio = 7.95 for oral cavity, 12.86 for oropharynx, 24.96 for hypopharynx and 6.60 for larynx). Conclusions: Present results further encourage the reduction of alcohol intensity to mitigate HNC risk

Epidemiological science and cancer control

Epidemiological methods are essential for the discovery of cancer risks and prognostic factors as well as for the evaluation of cancer prevention measures. In this review, we discuss epidemiological surveillance procedures for data collection and processing to guide and evaluate the consequences of anticancer efforts for populations, assess the identification of cancer risk factors, examine barriers to cancer screening and recommended rules for early diagnosis programs. Epidemiological studies have shown that hindrances to cancer information assessment are currently encountered in developing countries. Known cancer risk factors include social determinants, lifestyle factors, occupational exposures, infectious agents, and genetic and epigenetic alterations. Challenges remain in studying the effectiveness of cancer screening; screening can have detrimental effects, and few cancers clearly benefit from screening. Currently, epidemiology faces the challenge of dealing with distinct levels of data, including factors related to social status, lifestyle and genetics, to reconstruct the causal traits of cancer. Additionally, translating epidemiological knowledge into cancer control demands more implementation studies in the population

Age at Start of Using Tobacco on the Risk of Head and Neck Cancer: Pooled Analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium (INHANCE)

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is a well-established risk factor for head and neck cancer (HNC). However, less is known about the potential impact of exposure to tobacco at an early age on HNC risk. METHODS: We analyzed individual-level data on ever tobacco smokers from 27 case-control studies (17,146 HNC cases and 17,449 controls) in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology (INHANCE) consortium. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random-effects logistic regression models. RESULTS: Without adjusting for tobacco packyears, we observed that younger age at starting tobacco use was associated with an increased HNC risk for ever smokers (OR/=30 years: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.35, 1.97). However, the observed association between age at starting tobacco use and HNC risk became null after adjusting for tobacco packyears (OR/=30 years: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.80, 1.19). In the stratified analyses on HNC subsites by tobacco packyears or years since quitting, no difference in the association between age at start and HNC risk was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this pooled analysis suggest that increased HNC risks observed with earlier age at starting tobacco smoking are largely due to longer duration and higher cumulative tobacco exposures

Alcohol drinking and head and neck cancer risk: the joint effect of intensity and duration

Background: Alcohol is a well-established risk factor for head and neck cancer (HNC). This study aims to explore the effect of alcohol intensity and duration, as joint continuous exposures, on HNC risk. Methods: Data from 26 case-control studies in the INHANCE Consortium were used, including never and current drinkers who drunk ≤10 drinks/day for ≤54 years (24234 controls, 4085 oral cavity, 3359 oropharyngeal, 983 hypopharyngeal and 3340 laryngeal cancers). The dose-response relationship between the risk and the joint exposure to drinking intensity and duration was investigated through bivariate regression spline models, adjusting for potential confounders, including tobacco smoking. Results: For all subsites, cancer risk steeply increased with increasing drinks/day, with no appreciable threshold effect at lower intensities. For each intensity level, the risk of oral cavity, hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancers did not vary according to years of drinking, suggesting no effect of duration. For oropharyngeal cancer, the risk increased with durations up to 28 years, flattening thereafter. The risk peaked at the higher levels of intensity and duration for all subsites (odds ratio = 7.95 for oral cavity, 12.86 for oropharynx, 24.96 for hypopharynx and 6.60 for larynx). Conclusions: Present results further encourage the reduction of alcohol intensity to mitigate HNC risk