Background:Night shift work, exposure to light at night (ALAN) and circadian disruption may increase the risk of hormone-dependent cancers.Objectives:We evaluated the association of exposure to ALAN during sleeping time with breast and prostate cancer in a population based multicase–control study (MCC-Spain), among subjects who had never worked at night. We evaluated chronotype, a characteristic that may relate to adaptation to light at night.Methods:We enrolled 1,219 breast cancer cases, 1,385 female controls, 623 prostate cancer cases, and 879 male controls from 11 Spanish regions in 2008–2013. Indoor ALAN information was obtained through questionnaires. Outdoor ALAN was analyzed using images from the International Space Station (ISS) available for Barcelona and Madrid for 2012–2013, including data of remotely sensed upward light intensity and blue light spectrum information for each geocoded longest residence of each MCC-Spain subject.Results:Among Barcelona and Madrid participants with information on both indoor and outdoor ALAN, exposure to outdoor ALAN in the blue light spectrum was associated with breast cancer [adjusted odds ratio (OR) for highest vs. lowest tertile, OR=1.47; 95% CI: 1.00, 2.17] and prostate cancer (OR=2.05; 95% CI: 1.38, 3.03). In contrast, those exposed to the highest versus lowest intensity of outdoor ALAN were more likely to be controls than cases, particularly for prostate cancer. Compared with those who reported sleeping in total darkness, men who slept in “quite illuminated” bedrooms had a higher risk of prostate cancer (OR=2.79; 95% CI: 1.55, 5.04), whereas women had a slightly lower risk of breast cancer (OR=0.77; 95% CI: 0.39, 1.51).Conclusion:Both prostate and breast cancer were associated with high estimated exposure to outdoor ALAN in the blue-enriched light spectrum. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1837

We analyzed the most likely cause of 687 bovine tuberculosis (bTB) breakdowns detected in Spain between 2009 and 2011 (i.e., 22% of the total number of breakdowns detected during this period). Seven possible causes were considered: i) residual infection; ii) introduction of infected cattle from other herds; iii) sharing of pastures with infected herds; iv) contiguous spread from infected neighbor herds; v) presence of infected goats in the farm; vi) interaction with wildlife reservoirs and vii) contact with an infected human. For each possible cause a decision tree was developed and key questions were included in each of them. Answers to these key questions lead to different events within each decision tree. In order to assess the likelihood of occurrence of the different events a qualitative risk assessment approach was used. For this purpose, an expert opinion workshop was organized and ordinal values, ranging from 0 to 9 (i.e., null to very high likelihood of occurrence) were assigned. The analysis identified residual infection as the most frequent cause of bTB breakdowns (22.3%; 95%CI: 19.4–25.6), followed by interaction with wildlife reservoirs (13.1%; 95%CI: 10.8–15.8). The introduction of infected cattle, sharing of pastures and contiguous spread from infected neighbour herds were also identified as relevant causes. In 41.6% (95%CI: 38.0–45.4) of the breakdowns the origin of infection remained unknown.Veterinary officers conducting bTB breakdown investigations have to state their opinion about the possible cause of each breakdown. Comparison between the results of our analysis and the opinion from veterinary officers revealed a slight concordance. This slight agreement might reflect a lack of harmonized criteria to assess the most likely cause of bTB breakdowns as well as different perceptions about the importance of the possible causes. This is especially relevant in the case of the role of wildlife reservoirs.

No abstract