Cancer league actions against sunbed use for skin cancer prevention

Yared, Wendy; Boonen, B.; McElwee, Gerry; Ferguson, Marbeth

doi:10.1111/jdv.15319

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our analysis of the report of Suppa and Gandini (1) revealed severe weaknesses (Table I). The criticism previously addressed by us (8,9) and others (7) has not been adequately addressed in the report of Suppa and Gandini (1) or by others (2,3,5,6). The conclusions reported in those publications (1-3, 5, 6) are not sufficiently supported by present scientific knowledge and therefore are not in agreement with generally accepted principles of evidencebased medicine.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 78%

Sunbeds and Melanoma Risk: Many Open Questions, Not Yet Time to Close the Debate

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Intensive scientific debate is ongoing about whether moderate solarium use increases melanoma risk. The authors of some recent publications demand the debate be closed and propose "actions against solarium use for skin cancer prevention" because new studies have convincingly demonstrated causality. This minireview aims to investigate whether those demands are sufficiently supported by present scientific knowledge and comply with the principles of evidencebased medicine. Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic literature search (through June 2019; PubMed, ISI Web of Science) to identify publications investigating how solarium use affects melanoma risk. Results: We found no studies that demonstrate a causal relationship between moderate solarium use and melanoma risk. Results of cohort and casecontrol studies published to date, including recent investigations, do not prove causality, and randomized controlled trials providing unequivocal proof are still lacking. Moreover, the overall quality of observational studies is low as a result of severe limitations (including unobserved or unrecorded confounding), possibly leading to bias. We also disagree with recent claims that Hill's criteria for the epidemiological evidence of a causal relationship between a potential causal factor and an observed effect are fulfilled in regard to the conclusion that moderate solarium use per se would increase melanoma risk Conclusion: Current scientific knowledge does not demonstrate a causal relationship between moderate solarium use and melanoma risk. Therefore, the debate is not closed. An intensive scientific debate is ongoing about whether solarium use increases melanoma risk (1-34). We previously published a meta-analysis of observational studies investigating the association of sunbed use with melanoma, concluding that no convincing evidence exists that moderate solarium use may increase melanoma risk (8). However, some recent publications (1-6) claim that new studies that show associations between solarium use and melanoma risk have convincingly demonstrated causality, and demand the debate be closed (1), and propose "actions against solarium use for skin cancer prevention" (1). In particular, Suppa and Gandini in their review address the following: a) New studies investigating the influence of age at first sunbed exposure on melanoma risk, b) novel association of sunbed exposure with risk of melanoma at different body sites, c) new data about the relevance of sunbed use for the development of additional primary melanomas, d) the most recent findings of how many melanomas are attributable to sunbed use, e) new data about the association of indoor tanning with melanoma risk factors, f) a recent analysis of 501 This article is freely accessible online.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 78%

Sunbeds and Melanoma Risk: Many Open Questions, Not Yet Time to Close the Debate

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nail Lichen Planus

Piraccini¹,

Starace²,

Iorizzo³

2021

Advances in Nail Disease and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pathogenesis, Clinical Signs and Treatment Recommendations in Brittle Nails: A Review

Chessa

Iorizzo²,

Richert

et al. 2019

Dermatol Ther (Heidelb)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nail plate brittleness (or fragility) is a common complaint affecting up to 20% of the population, especially women over 50 years of age, with fingernail fragility being more prevalent than toenail fragility. Nail brittleness is characterized by nails that split, flake and crumble, become soft and lose elasticity. The main clinical presentations are: onychoschizia, onychorrhexis, superficial granulation of keratin and worn-down nails. According to causative factors, we can distinguish 2 forms of nail fragility (NF): a primary ''idiopathic or brittle nail syndrome'' form and NF secondary to different causes such as inflammatory nail disorders, infections, systemic diseases and general conditions, traumas and alteration of the nail hydration. Optimal management requires treatment of the primary cause of brittle nails, when possible. In idiopathic NF oral supplementation, vitamins (especially biotin, also known as vitamin B7), trace elements and amino acids (especially cysteine) have been reported to be useful. In addition, several products, such as topical moisturizers and lacquers could be considered to restructure the affected nail plate and to reduce psychological impacts of this common problem.

show abstract

Cancer league actions against sunbed use for skin cancer prevention

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

Sunbeds and Melanoma Risk: Many Open Questions, Not Yet Time to Close the Debate

Sunbeds and Melanoma Risk: Many Open Questions, Not Yet Time to Close the Debate

Nail Lichen Planus

Pathogenesis, Clinical Signs and Treatment Recommendations in Brittle Nails: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About