A case-control study of lung cancer with special reference to the effect of air pollution in Poland.

Jędrychowski, Wiesław; Becher, Heiko; Wahrendorf, Jürgen; Basa-Cierpiałek, Z

doi:10.1136/jech.44.2.114

Cited by 127 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several cohort and case-control studies of outdoor air pollution have been reported (Stocks and Campbell, 1955;Hammond and Horn, 1958a/b;Haenszel et al, 1962;Haenszel and Taeuber, 1964;Dean, 1966;Hitosugi, 1968;Hammond, 1972;Cederlo¨f et al, 1975;Dean et al, 1977Dean et al, , 1978Pike et al, 1979;Hammond and Garfinkel, 1980;Doll and Peto, 1981;Vena, 1982;Tenkanen et al, 1985;Brownson et al, 1987;Samet et al, 1987;Tenkanen and Teppo, 1987;Xu et al, 1989;Jedrychowski et al, 1990;Holowaty et al, 1991;Katsouyanni et al, 1991;Mills et al, 1991;Jo¨ckel et al, 1992;Dockery et al, 1993;Tenkanen, 1993;Barbone et al, 1995;Pope et al, 1995;Zaridze et al, 1995;Biggeri et al, 1996;Engholm et al, 1996;Pawlega et al, 1997;Beeson et al, 1998;Abbey et al, 1999;McDonnell et al, 2000;Nyberg et al, 2000;Hoek et al, 2002;Pope et al, 2002). Overall, the studies suggest relative risks (RRs) of up to about 1.5 for urban vs rural residence or high vs low estimated air pollution exposure.…”

Section: Cancer Risk From Outdoor Air Pollutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Earlier analytical studies generally compared residence in urban areas, where the air is considered more polluted, to residence in rural areas, sometimes providing limited data on the typical levels of some pollutants in the areas studied. Other studies have attempted to address exposure to specific components of outdoor air, providing risk estimates in relation to quantitative or semiquantitative air pollution exposure assessments (Hitosugi, 1968;Vena, 1982;Brownson et al, 1987;Jedrychowski et al, 1990;Katsouyanni et al, 1991;Mills et al, 1991;Jo¨ckel et al, 1992;Dockery et al, 1993 Biggeri et al, 1996;Pawlega et al, 1997;Abbey et al, 1999) or, in some cases, to more qualitative exposure assessments (Pike et al, 1979;Xu et al, 1989). Another type of study has addressed residence in the proximity of specific sources of pollution, such as major industrial emission sources or heavy road traffic.…”

Section: Cancer Risk From Outdoor Air Pollutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is no clear indication if early or late exposure is more important, and data on possible interaction with smoking or occupational exposures are inadequate. Among these studies, four cohort (Mills et al, 1991;Dockery et al, 1993;Pope et al, 1995Pope et al, , 2002Abbey et al, 1999;McDonnell et al, 2000;Hoek et al, 2002) and 10 casecontrol (Hitosugi, 1968;Vena, 1982;Brownson et al, 1987;Jedrychowski et al, 1990;Katsouyanni et al, 1991;Jo¨ckel et al, 1992;Barbone et al, 1995;Zaridze et al, 1995;Pawlega et al, 1997;Nyberg et al, 2000) studies were based on measurements of specific air components. Selected results from these studies, with the corresponding air pollution differentials, are presented in Table 2: they tend to show an increased risk of lung cancer in the categories at highest exposure, which does not seem to be attributable to confounding factors.…”

Section: Cancer Risk From Outdoor Air Pollutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Epidemiology of environmental and occupational cancer

Boffetta

2004

Oncogene

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental carcinogens, in a strict sense, include outdoor and indoor air pollutants, as well as soil and drinking water contaminants. An increased risk of mesothelioma has consistently been detected among individuals experiencing residential exposure to asbestos, while results for lung cancer are less consistent. Several good-quality studies have investigated lung cancer risk from outdoor air pollution based on measurement of specific agents. Their results tend to show an increased risk in the categories at highest exposure, with relative risks in the range 1.5. A causal association has been established between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer, with a relative risk in the order of 1.2. Radon is another carcinogen present in indoor air, with a relative risk in the order of 1.06 for exposure at 100 Bq/m 3 . In several Asian populations, an increased risk of lung cancer results among women from indoor pollution from cooking and heating. There is strong evidence of an increased risk of bladder, skin and lung cancers following consumption of water with high arsenic contamination; results for other drinking water contaminants, including chlorination by-products, are inconclusive. A total of 29 occupational agents are established human carcinogens, and another 30 agents are suspected carcinogens. In addition, at least 12 exposure circumstances entail exposure to carcinogens. Exposure is still widespread for many important occupational carcinogens, such as asbestos, coal tar, arsenic and silica, in particular in developing countries. Although estimates of the global burden of occupational and environmental cancer result in figures in the order of 2% and less than 1%, respectively, these cancers concentrate in subgroups of the population; furthermore, exposure is involuntary and can, to a large extent, be avoided.

show abstract

Section: Cancer Risk From Outdoor Air Pollutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cancer Risk From Outdoor Air Pollutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cancer Risk From Outdoor Air Pollutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Epidemiology of environmental and occupational cancer

Boffetta

2004

Oncogene

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lung cancer in humans is also associated with exposures to a variety of other chemical agents (Sanders 1986;Williams and Sandler 2001). The RR for lung cancer for residents in urban areas of high air pollution is about 1.5 times greater than for people living in rural areas (Lave and Seskin 1970;Jedrychowski et al 1990). The BEIR VII report (NRC 2005) and radioprotection agencies have not considered the role of many posi-C. L. Sanders and B. R. Scott tive and negative confounding factors in determining risk estimates of lung cancer from exposure to ionizing radiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smoking and Hormesis as Confounding Factors in Radiation Pulmonary Carcinogenesis

Sanders

Scott

2006

Dose-Response

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ᮀ Confounding factors in radiation pulmonary carcinogenesis are passive and active cigarette smoke exposures and radiation hormesis. Significantly increased lung cancer risk from ionizing radiation at lung doses < 1 Gy is not observed in never smokers exposed to ionizing radiations. Residential radon is not a cause of lung cancer in never smokers and may protect against lung cancer in smokers. The risk of lung cancer found in many epidemiological studies was less than the expected risk (hormetic effect) for nuclear weapons and power plant workers, shipyard workers, fluoroscopy patients, and inhabitants of highdose background radiation. The protective effect was noted for low-and mixed high-and low-linear energy transfer (LET) radiations in both genders. Many studies showed a protection factor (PROFAC) > 0.40 (40% avoided) against the occurrence of lung cancer. The ubiquitous nature of the radiation hormesis response in cellular, animal, and epidemiological studies negates the healthy worker effect as an explanation for radiation hormesis. Low-dose radiation may stimulate DNA repair/apoptosis and immunity to suppress and eliminate cigarette-smoke-induced transformed cells in the lung, reducing lung cancer occurrence in smokers.

show abstract

“…Several studies have reported an association between risk of lung cancer and proximity to certain industries, such as iron and steel foundries or chemical, petrochemical and coke oven plants [18][19][20][21]. Another study reported increased lung cancer mortality in the proximity of a combustion installation located in Asturias [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge and Practice towards Lung Cancer among University Students

Al-Naggar¹

2012

J Community Med Health Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the knowledge and practice towards lung cancer among university students.Methodology: Cross-sectional study was conducted among Management and Science University students (MSU). Two hundred and thirteen students were selected randomly from all faculties. The data were collected from the lectures halls, library and university café. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 13, t-test was used for univariate analysis. Multiple linear regressions were used for multivariate analysis.Results: A total number of 213 university students participated in this study. The majority of them females, 22 years old and younger, Malays, single, from non-medical schools and with family monthly income 3000 Ringgit Malaysia (RM) and less (57.3%, 65.3%, 78.4%, 97.2%, 55.9%, 59.6%, and 66.7%; respectively). The majority of the participants mentioned that they knew about lung cancer (93%). Regarding the knowledge about risk factors towards lung cancer, they knew that the risk factors of lung cancer are: smoking (100%), eating chili and deep fried food (68.5%), air pollution (89.2%), alcohol (75.6%), occupational hazard (75.6%), passive smoking (90.1%), exercise reduce the risk of lung cancer (83.1%) and lung cancer is inherited (51.6%). Regarding the practice towards lung cancer prevention, the majority of the participants mentioned that they are not smokers neither alcohol drinkers (90.1%, 94.8%; respectively). Regarding the factors associated with knowledge about lung cancer, marital status, type of faculty, and type of semester significantly influence the knowledge of university students (p=0.014, p=0.001, p=0.028; respectively) in univariate analysis. For multivariate analysis, only types of faculty significantly influence the knowledge of the university students towards lung cancer (p=0.001). Conclusion:The university students had good knowledge about risk factors. Types of faculty significantly influence the knowledge of the university students towards lung cancer.

show abstract

A case-control study of lung cancer with special reference to the effect of air pollution in Poland.

Cited by 127 publications

References 28 publications

Epidemiology of environmental and occupational cancer

Epidemiology of environmental and occupational cancer

Smoking and Hormesis as Confounding Factors in Radiation Pulmonary Carcinogenesis

Knowledge and Practice towards Lung Cancer among University Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About