ABSTRACT
Parental smoking data have been re-abstracted from the interview records of the Inter-Regional Epidemiological Study of Childhood Cancer (IRESCC) to test further the hypothesis that paternal cigarette smoking is a risk factor for the generality of childhood cancer. Reported cigarette smoking habits for the parents of 555 children diagnosed with cancer in the period 1980-1983 were compared, in two separate matched pairs analyses, with similar information for the parents of 555 children selected from GP lists (GP controls) and for the parents of 555 hospitalized children (hospital controls). When cases were compared with GP controls there was a statistically significant positive trend (P = 0.02) between the risk of childhood cancer and paternal daily consumption of cigarettes before the pregnancy; there was no significant trend for maternal smoking habit. When cases were compared with hospital controls there was a statistically significant negative trend (P< 0.001) between the risk of childhood cancer and maternal daily consumption of cigarettes before the pregnancy; there was no significant trend for paternal smoking habit. Neither of the significant trends could be explained by adjustment for socioeconomic grouping, ethnic origin or parental age at the birth of the child, or by simultaneous analysis of parental smoking habits. Relations between maternal consumption of cigarettes and birth weights suggested that (maternal) smoking data were equally reliable for case and control subjects, although comparisons with national data suggested that the hospital control parents were unusually heavy smokers. These findings give some support for the hypothesis that paternal cigarette smoking is a potential risk factor for the generality of childhood cancers.
Subject(s)
Fathers , Mothers , Neoplasms/etiology , Tobacco Smoke Pollution/adverse effects , Adult , Age Factors , Case-Control Studies , Child , Humans , Matched-Pair Analysis , Maternal Age , RiskABSTRACT
Several studies have revealed an excess of malformations in children with certain malignancies. A few environmental causes have been identified which may damage the foetus and lead to malformation and cancer. However, most of the numerous recognised cancer/malformation syndromes are genetically determined. This report describes a case-control study of 555 newly diagnosed children with cancer and 1,110 matched controls, chosen from general practitioner lists (GP controls) and hospital admissions (H controls). Their parents were interviewed on topics of possible aetiological significance and medical records were checked to confirm reports at interview. The numbers of congenital malformations in the index and GP control children, and the relatives of the index children, the GP and H controls are described. There were more children with malformations among the cases (60/555) than among the GP controls (27/555), P < 0.001. The abnormalities in the cases included eight with specific chromosomal/genetic conditions (e.g. Down's syndrome, XY gonadal dysgenesis, Von Recklinghausen's neurofibromatosis, Goldenhar's syndrome) whereas only one GP control child had a chromosomal defect (P < 0.05). Five case children but no GP controls had neural tube defects; this is not statistically significant. No excess of malformations was found in the siblings of cases compared with GP and H control siblings. Case mothers had a small excess of malformations (22/555) compared with GP controls (8/555), P < 0.05. Among more distant relatives the results were difficult to interpret because of the relatively small numbers in the diagnostic subgroups and because of apparent under reporting in grandparents, but no striking differences were seen between case and control relatives. The excess of malformations found in children with cancer, compared with controls, without a similar excess of malformations in their close relatives may indicate that in some (perhaps very roughly one in 20) cases antenatal events may lead both to the malformation and the malignancy.
