Although vinyl chloride is an established cause of liver angiosarcoma, the evidence is inconclusive on whether it also causes other neoplastic and nonneoplastic chronic liver diseases as well as neoplasms in other organs. Furthermore, the shape of the dose-response relation for angiosarcoma is uncertain. We have extended for approximately 8 years the mortality and cancer incidence follow-up of 12,700 male workers in the vinyl chloride industry in four European countries. All-cause mortality was lower than expected, whereas cancer mortality was close to expected. A total of 53 deaths from primary liver cancer (standardized mortality ratio 2.40, 95% confidence interval = 1.80-3.14) and 18 incident cases of liver cancer were identified, including 37 angiosarcomas, 10 hepatocellular carcinomas, and 24 liver cancers of other and unknown histology. In Poisson regression analyses we observed a marked exposure response for all liver cancers, angiosarcoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The exposure-response trend estimated for liver cancer in analyses restricted to cohort members with cumulative exposures of <1,500 parts per million-years was close to that estimated for the full cohort (relative risk of 2.0 per logarithmic unit of cumulative dose). No strong relation was observed between cumulative vinyl chloride exposure and other cancers. Although cirrhosis mortality was decreased overall, there was a trend with cumulative exposure.

Epidemiological evidence on the relation between aromatic amines and cancer risk is reviewed. In particular, cancer risk in humans resulting from exposure to aromatic amines from occupational sources and tobacco smoking is assessed with reference to ecologic, cohort, and case-control studies. Seven arylamines have been classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer: benzidine-based dyes and MOCA (4,4'-methylene bis 2-choloroaniline) were considered 'probably' carcinogenic, Group 2A, because of a high level of evidence in experimental animals; two occupational chemicals (2-naphthylamine and benzidine), one drug (Chlornaphazine), and two manufacturing processes (manufacture of auramine and magenta) were included in Group 1 on the basis of 'sufficient' evidence of carcinogenicity in humans. Occupational exposures to aromatic amines explain up to 25 percent of bladder cancers in some areas of Western countries; these estimates might be higher in limited areas of developing countries. Aromatic amines contaminate the ambient air as a component of environmental tobacco smoke. There is increasing evidence that the excess of bladder cancer in smokers is attributable to aromatic amines rather than to other contaminants of tobacco smoke such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). A modulating role in the risk of bladder cancer associated with exposure to aromatic amines is played by metabolic polymorphisms, such as the N-acetyltransferase genotype, raising important social and ethical issues. The consistent observation of a difference between men and women in bladder cancer risk, after allowing for known risk factors, suggests consideration of gender-related biological determinants for future investigation.

Background: Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans.Objectives: The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed.Discussion: We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed.Conclusions: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public’s health.Citation: Pearce N, Blair A, Vineis P, Ahrens W, Andersen A, Anto JM, Armstrong BK, Baccarelli AA, Beland FA, Berrington A, Bertazzi PA, Birnbaum LS, Brownson RC, Bucher JR, Cantor KP, Cardis E, Cherrie JW, Christiani DC, Cocco P, Coggon D, Comba P, Demers PA, Dement JM, Douwes J, Eisen EA, Engel LS, Fenske RA, Fleming LE, Fletcher T, Fontham E, Forastiere F, Frentzel-Beyme R, Fritschi L, Gerin M, Goldberg M, Grandjean P, Grimsrud TK, Gustavsson P, Haines A, Hartge P, Hansen J, Hauptmann M, Heederik D, Hemminki K, Hemon D, Hertz-Picciotto I, Hoppin JA, Huff J, Jarvholm B, Kang D, Karagas MR, Kjaerheim K, Kjuus H, Kogevinas M, Kriebel D, Kristensen P, Kromhout H, Laden F, Lebailly P, LeMasters G, Lubin JH, Lynch CF, Lynge E, ‘t Mannetje A, McMichael AJ, McLaughlin JR, Marrett L, Martuzzi M, Merchant JA, Merler E, Merletti F, Miller A, Mirer FE, Monson R, Nordby KC, Olshan AF, Parent ME, Perera FP, Perry MJ, Pesatori AC, Pirastu R, Porta M, Pukkala E, Rice C, Richardson DB, Ritter L, Ritz B, Ronckers CM, Rushton L, Rusiecki JA, Rusyn I, Samet JM, Sandler DP, de Sanjose S, Schernhammer E, Seniori Costantini A, Seixas N, Shy C, Siemiatycki J, Silverman DT, Simonato L, Smith AH, Smith MT, Spinelli JJ, Spitz MR, Stallones L, Stayner LT, Steenland ...

The National Environmental Remediation programme in Italy includes sites with documented contamination and associated potential health impacts (National Priority Contaminated Sites—NPCSs). SENTIERI Project, an extensive investigation of mortality in 44 NPCSs, considered the area of Taranto, a NPCS where a number of polluting sources are present. Health indicators available at municipality level were analyzed, that is, mortality (2003–2009), mortality time trend (1980–2008), and cancer incidence (2006-2007). In addition, the cohort of individuals living in the area was followed up to evaluate mortality (1998–2008) and morbidity (1998–2010) by district of residence. The results of the study consistently showed excess risks for a number of causes of death in both genders, among them: all causes, all cancers, lung cancer, and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, both acute and chronic. An increased infant mortality was also observed from the time trends analysis. Mortality/morbidity excesses were detected in residents living in districts near the industrial area, for several disorders including cancer, cardiovascular, and respiratory diseases. These coherent findings from different epidemiological approaches corroborate the need to promptly proceed with environmental cleanup interventions. Most diseases showing an increase in Taranto NPCS have a multifactorial etiology, and preventive measures of proven efficacy (e.g., smoking cessation and cardiovascular risk reduction programs, breast cancer screening) should be planned. The study results and public health actions are to be communicated objectively and transparently so that a climate of confidence and trust between citizens and public institutions is maintained.

No abstract