Cancer Incidence in Asbestos-Exposed Workers: An Update on Four Finnish Cohorts

BACKGROUND: We assessed the cancer risks of four different Finnish asbestos-exposed cohorts. We also explored if the cohorts with varying profiles of asbestos exposure exhibited varying relative risks of cancer. METHODS: The incident cancer cases for the asbestos-exposed worker cohorts were updated to the end of 2012 using the files of the Finnish Cancer Registry. The previously formed cohorts consisted of asbestos mine workers, asbestosis patients, asbestos sprayers, and workers who had taken part in a screening study based on asbestos exposure at work. RESULTS: The standardized incidence ratio (SIR) for mesothelioma varied from about threefold to > 100-fold in the different cohorts. In the screening cohort the SIR for mesothelioma was highest in 2003–2007, In other cohorts it was more constant in 5-year period inspection. The SIR for lung cancer was about twofold to tenfold in all except the screening cohort. Asbestos sprayers were at the highest risk of mesothelioma and lung cancer. CONCLUSION: The SIR for mesothelioma is high in all of the cohorts that represent different kinds of asbestos exposure. The smaller SIR for mesothelioma in the screening cohort with lowest level of asbestos exposure might suggest dose-responsiveness between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma. It does seem that the highest risk of lung cancer in these cohorts except in the youngest of the cohorts, the screening cohort, is over. The highest SIR for lung cancer of the asbestosis patient and sprayers cohort is explained by their heavy asbestos exposure.

Risk Factors for Breast Cancer, Including Occupational Exposures

The knowledge on the etiology of breast cancer has advanced substantially in recent years, and several etiological factors are now firmly established. However, very few new discoveries have been made in relation to occupational risk factors. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has evaluated over 900 different exposures or agents to-date to determine whether they are carcinogenic to humans. These evaluations are published as a series of Monographs (www.iarc.fr). For breast cancer the following substances have been classified as "carcinogenic to humans" (Group 1): alcoholic beverages, exposure to diethylstilbestrol, estrogen-progestogen contraceptives, estrogen-progestogen hormone replacement therapy and exposure to X-radiation and gamma-radiation (in special populations such as atomic bomb survivors, medical patients, and in-utero exposure). Ethylene oxide is also classified as a Group 1 carcinogen, although the evidence for carcinogenicity in epidemiologic studies, and specifically for the human breast, is limited. The classification "probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2A) includes estrogen hormone replacement therapy, tobacco smoking, and shift work involving circadian disruption, including work as a flight attendant. If the association between shift work and breast cancer, the most common female cancer, is confirmed, shift work could become the leading cause of occupational cancer in women.

The Cancer-preventive Potential of Panax ginseng: A Review of Human and Experimental Evidence / 예방의학회지

OBJECTIVE: We have reviewed the potential cancer preventive and other relevant properties of Panax ginseng C. A. Meyer, which has been traditionally used as a natural tonic in oriental countries. DATA IDENTIFICATION AND STUDY SELECTION: Publications on Panax ginseng and its relation to cancer were obtained from the Medline database (1983-2000) and by checking reference lists to find earlier reports. The reports cover experimental models and human studies on cancer-preventive activity, carcinogenicity and other beneficial or adverse effects. In addition, possible mechanisms of chemoprevention by ginseng were also considered. RESULTS: Published results from a cohort and two case-control studies in Korea suggest that the intake of ginseng may reduce the risk of several types of cancer. When ginseng was tested in animal models, a reduction in cancer incidence and multiplicity at various sites was noted. Panax ginseng and its chemical constituents have been tested for their inhibiting effect on putative carcinogenesis mechanisms (e.g., cell proliferation and apoptosis, immunosurveillance, angiogenesis); in most experiments inhibitory effects were found. CONCLUSION: While Panax ginseng C. A. Meyer has shown cancer preventive effects both in experimental models and in epidemiological studies, the evidence is currently not conclusive as to its cancer-preventive activity in humans. The available evidence warrants further research into the possible role of ginseng in the prevention of human cancer and carcinogenesis.