Body mass index change in adulthood and lung and upper aerodigestive tract cancers

Body mass index (BMI) has been inversely associated with lung and upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancers. However, only a few studies have assessed BMI change in adulthood in relation to cancer. To understand the relationship between BMI change and these cancers in both men and women, we analyzed data from a population‐based case–control study conducted in Los Angeles County. Adulthood BMI change was measured as the proportional change in BMI between age 21 and 1 year before interview or diagnosis. Five categories of BMI change were included, and individuals with no more than a 5% loss or gain were defined as having a stable BMI (reference group). Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression models. Potential confounders included age, gender, ethnicity, education, tobacco smoking and energy intake. For UADT cancers, we also adjusted for alcohol drinking status and frequency. A BMI gain of 25% or higher in adulthood was inversely associated with lung cancer (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33–0.84) and UADT cancers (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27–0.71). In subgroup analyses, a BMI gain of ≥25% was inversely associated with lung and UADT cancers among current and former smokers, as well as among current and former alcohol drinkers. The inverse association persisted among moderate and heavy smokers (≥20 pack‐years). The observed inverse associations between adulthood BMI gain and lung and UADT cancers indicate a potential role for body weight‐related biological pathways in the development of lung and UADT cancers.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/92436/1/27383_ftp.pd

Providers’ preferences for pediatric oral health information in the electronic health record: a cross-sectional survey

Abstract Background The majority of primary care physicians support integration of children’s oral health promotion and disease prevention into their practices but can experience challenges integrating oral health services into their workflow. Most electronic health records (EHRs) in primary care settings do not include oral health information for pediatric patients. Therefore, it is important to understand providers’ preferences for oral health information within the EHR. The objectives of this study are to assess (1) the relative importance of various elements of pediatric oral health information for primary care providers to have in the EHR and (2) the extent to which practice and provider characteristics are associated with these information preferences. Methods We surveyed a sample of primary care physicians who conducted Medicaid well-child visits in North Carolina from August – December 2013. Using descriptive statistics, we analyzed primary care physicians’ oral health information preferences relative to their information preferences for traditional preventive aspects of well-child visits. Furthermore, we analyzed associations between oral health information preferences and provider- and practice-level characteristics using an ordinary least squares regression model. Results Fewer primary care providers reported that pediatric oral health information is “very important,” as compared to more traditional elements of primary care information, such as tracking immunizations. However, the majority of respondents reported some elements of oral health information as being very important. Also, we found positive associations between the percentage of well child visits in which oral health screenings and oral health referrals are performed and the reported importance of having pediatric oral health information in the EHR. Conclusions Incorporating oral health information into the EHR may be desirable for providers, particularly those who perform oral health screenings and dental referrals

Systematic Review of Potential Health Risks Posed by Pharmaceutical, Occupational and Consumer Exposures to Metallic and Nanoscale Aluminum, Aluminum Oxides, Aluminum Hydroxide and Its Soluble Salts

Aluminum (Al) is a ubiquitous substance encountered both naturally (as the third most abundant element) and intentionally (used in water, foods, pharmaceuticals, and vaccines); it is also present in ambient and occupational airborne particulates. Existing data underscore the importance of Al physical and chemical forms in relation to its uptake, accumulation, and systemic bioavailability. The present review represents a systematic examination of the peer-reviewed literature on the adverse health effects of Al materials published since a previous critical evaluation compiled by Krewski et al. (2007). Challenges encountered in carrying out the present review reflected the experimental use of different physical and chemical Al forms, different routes of administration, and different target organs in relation to the magnitude, frequency, and duration of exposure. Wide variations in diet can result in Al intakes that are often higher than the World Health Organization provisional tolerable weekly intake (PTWI), which is based on studies with Al citrate. Comparing daily dietary Al exposures on the basis of “total Al”assumes that gastrointestinal bioavailability for all dietary Al forms is equivalent to that for Al citrate, an approach that requires validation. Current occupational exposure limits (OELs) for identical Al substances vary as much as 15-fold. The toxicity of different Al forms depends in large measure on their physical behavior and relative solubility in water. The toxicity of soluble Al forms depends upon the delivered dose of Al+ 3 to target tissues. Trivalent Al reacts with water to produce bidentate superoxide coordination spheres [Al(O2)(H2O4)+ 2 and Al(H2O)6 + 3] that after complexation with O2•−, generate Al superoxides [Al(O2•)](H2O5)]+ 2. Semireduced AlO2• radicals deplete mitochondrial Fe and promote generation of H2O2, O2 • − and OH•. Thus, it is the Al+ 3-induced formation of oxygen radicals that accounts for the oxidative damage that leads to intrinsic apoptosis. In contrast, the toxicity of the insoluble Al oxides depends primarily on their behavior as particulates. Aluminum has been held responsible for human morbidity and mortality, but there is no consistent and convincing evidence to associate the Al found in food and drinking water at the doses and chemical forms presently consumed by people living in North America and Western Europe with increased risk for Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD). Neither is there clear evidence to show use of Al-containing underarm antiperspirants or cosmetics increases the risk of AD or breast cancer. Metallic Al, its oxides, and common Al salts have not been shown to be either genotoxic or carcinogenic. Aluminum exposures during neonatal and pediatric parenteral nutrition (PN) can impair bone mineralization and delay neurological development. Adverse effects to vaccines with Al adjuvants have occurred; however, recent controlled trials found that the immunologic response to certain vaccines with Al adjuvants was no greater, and in some cases less than, that after identical vaccination without Al adjuvants. The scientific literature on the adverse health effects of Al is extensive. Health risk assessments for Al must take into account individual co-factors (e.g., age, renal function, diet, gastric pH). Conclusions from the current review point to the need for refinement of the PTWI, reduction of Al contamination in PN solutions, justification for routine addition of Al to vaccines, and harmonization of OELs for Al substances