Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence

Zhang, Luoping; Rana, Iemaan; Shaffer, Rachel M.; Taioli, Emanuela; Sheppard, Lianne

doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2019.02.001

Cited by 258 publications

(157 citation statements)

References 100 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These observations are in agreement with El-Rokiek et al (2015), where despite yield improvement of 58% due to glyphosate spraying, compared to the control, a 28% reduction in yield was still observed compared to O.crenata free conditions. With no improvement in faba bean yield compared to the control after glyphosate spraying and with the health risks the herbicide pauses to human health (Zhang et al 2019); we do not recommend glyphosate as a control method for O.crenata in faba bean fields.…”

Section: Effect Of Faba Bean Varietiesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Effect of Glyphosate on Performance of Faba Bean Varieties Under Heavy Infestation of Orobanche crenata

Zeid

Hemeid

2019

Alexandria Science Exchange Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orobanche crenata is a devastating parasitic weed on faba bean with its effects not confined to the Mediterranean region anymore. This study investigated the effect of number of glyphosate sprays, at the rate of 86g a.i./ha, on the performance of a set of faba bean varieties varying in their resistance to the parasite under farmer's field conditions. The main target was to find out whether faba bean resistance coupled with glyphosate application could be adopted as standard procedure for efficiently combating the parasite. Results indicated that, under current farmer's field conditions, spraying resulted in a clear reduction in the number of emerged spikes from 18 to 49% and the amount of photo-assimilates accumulated by the parasite from 1 to 42%, depending on the variety and that was related to the number of sprays applied. There was no improvement in faba bean yield associated with the reduction in infestation under glyphosate sprays compared to the control, even with the most resistant faba bean varieties known in Egypt; namely Giza 843, Misr 1 and Misr 3. Considering its cost and impact on human health, glyphosate is not recommended for infested faba bean fields. In heavily infested fields, it is recommended to employ other integrated pest management protocols that aim at reducing the parasite seed bank per se before considering any winter pulses. This halt on winter pulses is essential to deplete the seed bank and prevent further spread of the parasite and should continue until a better technology to combat the parasite evolves. The new Misr 3 was seen here as a very promising variety that generally combines both good yield and low number of emerged spikes compared to older varieties Giza 843 and Misr 1.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Faba Bean Varietiesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Effect of Glyphosate on Performance of Faba Bean Varieties Under Heavy Infestation of Orobanche crenata

Zeid

Hemeid

2019

Alexandria Science Exchange Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In humans, GBHs have been shown to increase the risk ratios for non-Hodgkins lymphomas (NHL) in several meta-analyses [2,[57][58][59]. For over 30 years, mouse models have been studied and evaluated as surrogates for NHL [60][61][62][63][64].…”

Section: Related Findings From the Peer-reviewed Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive analysis of the animal carcinogenicity data for glyphosate from chronic exposure rodent carcinogenicity studies

Portier

2020

Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the introduction of glyphosate-tolerant genetically-modified plants, the global use of glyphosate has increased dramatically making it the most widely used pesticide on the planet. There is considerable controversy concerning the carcinogenicity of glyphosate with scientists and regulatory authorities involved in the review of glyphosate having markedly different opinions. One key aspect of these opinions is the degree to which glyphosate causes cancer in laboratory animals after lifetime exposure. In this review, twenty-one chronic exposure animal carcinogenicity studies of glyphosate are identified from regulatory documents and reviews; 13 studies are of sufficient quality and detail to be reanalyzed in this review using trend tests, historical control tests and pooled analyses. The analyses identify 37 significant tumor findings in these studies and demonstrate consistency across studies in the same sex/species/strain for many of these tumors. Considering analyses of the individual studies, the consistency of the data across studies, the pooled analyses, the historical control data, non-neoplastic lesions, mechanistic evidence and the associated scientific literature, the tumor increases seen in this review are categorized as to the strength of the evidence that glyphosate causes these cancers. The strongest evidence shows that glyphosate causes hemangiosarcomas, kidney tumors and malignant lymphomas in male CD-1 mice, hemangiomas and malignant lymphomas in female CD-1 mice, hemangiomas in female Swiss albino mice, kidney adenomas, liver adenomas, skin keratoacanthomas and skin basal cell tumors in male Sprague-Dawley rats, adrenal cortical carcinomas in female Sprague-Dawley rats and hepatocellular adenomas and skin keratocanthomas in male Wistar rats.

show abstract

“…Meta‐analysis is a quantitative statistical tool that is frequently applied to consolidate the results from similar but separate individual studies so that an overall conclusion about the effects of exposure can be drawn. There have been at least three meta‐analytic studies of glyphosate and NHL that have combined data from epidemiological studies in order to arrive at an overall conclusion about any association between glyphosate exposure and NHL (Chang & Delzell, ; Zhang, Rana, Shaffer, Taioli, & Shepherd, ; Schinasi & Leon, ). The most recent of these (Zhang et al., ) relied on the same seven epidemiological studies that are considered herein and is the only one of the meta‐analyses recent enough to include the Andreotti et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Zhang et al. () contain lists of “Weaknesses” of each of the seven epidemiological studies in tabular form, but recall bias is not mentioned in the lists. The text mentions recall bias twice, noting that cohort studies can “minimize recall bias,” and stating “It is always possible for the internal validity of case–control studies to be threatened recall bias, …” However, there is no discussion of the potential effect of this form of bias upon the results of the meta‐analysis, neither is there an attempt in the meta‐analysis to compensate for such bias in the studies used in the meta‐analysis (assuming this is even possible).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Potential Effects of Recall Bias and Selection Bias on the Epidemiological Evidence for the Carcinogenicity of Glyphosate

Crump¹

2019

Risk Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glyphosate is a widely used herbicide worldwide. The International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2015 declared that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans, noting a positive association for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The principal human data on glyphosate and NHL come from five case-control studies and two cohort studies. The case-control studies are at risk of recall bias resulting from information on exposure to pesticides being collected from cases and controls based on their memories. In addition, two of the case-control studies are additionally at risk of a form of selection bias that can exacerbate the effect of recall bias. Both biases are in the direction of making glyphosate appear carcinogenic. If odds ratios (ORs) are not biased and a pesticide plays no role in causing NHL, the probability that an OR for that pesticide is greater than 1.0 is approximately 0.5. The fractions of ORs for pesticides other than glyphosate that are greater than 1.0 in the case-control studies are 0.90 (n = 92), 0.90 (n = 152), 0.93 (n = 59), 0.76 (n = 140), and 0.53 (n = 54), the first two from studies that are at risk for both types of bias. In the two cohort studies, which are not subject to these biases, the comparable fractions for relative risks for all cancers are 0.51 (n = 70) and 0.48 (n = 158). These results comply closely with what would be expected if evidence for carcinogenicity of glyphosate in these studies results from statistical bias in the case-control studies.

show abstract

Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence

Cited by 258 publications

References 100 publications

Effect of Glyphosate on Performance of Faba Bean Varieties Under Heavy Infestation of Orobanche crenata

Effect of Glyphosate on Performance of Faba Bean Varieties Under Heavy Infestation of Orobanche crenata

A comprehensive analysis of the animal carcinogenicity data for glyphosate from chronic exposure rodent carcinogenicity studies

The Potential Effects of Recall Bias and Selection Bias on the Epidemiological Evidence for the Carcinogenicity of Glyphosate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About