Associations of Plasma Concentrations of Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene and Polychlorinated Biphenyls with Prostate Cancer: A Case–Control Study in Guadeloupe (French West Indies)

Abstract

Background:Long-term exposure to persistent pollutants with hormonal properties (endocrine-disrupting chemicals; EDCs) may contribute to the risk of prostate cancer (PCa). However, epidemiological evidence remains limited.Objectives:We investigated the relationship between PCa and plasma concentrations of universally widespread pollutants, in particular p,p´-dichlorodiphenyl dichloroethene (DDE) and the non-dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyl congener 153 (PCB-153).Methods:We evaluated 576 men with newly diagnosed PCa (before treatment) and 655 controls in Guadeloupe (French West Indies). Exposure was analyzed according to case–control status. Associations were assessed by unconditional logistic regression analysis, controlling for confounding factors. Missing data were handled by multiple imputation.Results:We estimated a significant positive association between DDE and PCa [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.53; 95% CI: 1.02, 2.30 for the highest vs. lowest quintile of exposure; ptrend = 0.01]. PCB-153 was inversely associated with PCa (OR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.47 for the highest vs. lowest quintile of exposure values; ptrend < 0.001). Also, PCB-153 was more strongly associated with low-grade than with high-grade PCa.Conclusions:Associations of PCa with DDE and PCB-153 were in opposite directions. This may reflect differences in the mechanisms of action of these EDCs; and although our findings need to be replicated in other populations, they are consistent with complex effects of EDCs on human health.Citation:Emeville E, Giusti A, Coumoul X, Thomé JP, Blanchet P, Multigner L. 2015. Associations of plasma concentrations of dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene and polychlorinated biphenyls with prostate cancer: a case–control study in Guadeloupe (French West Indies). Environ Health Perspect 123:317–323; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408407

Organochlorine pesticides and prostate cancer, Is there an association? A meta-analysis of epidemiological evidence

“…After reviewing full text of the 88 potentially eligible articles, 73 were excluded for various reasons as presented in the flowchart. Finally, we systematically reviewed fifteen studies [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46], while the estimates reported by ten articles were included in the meta-analysis. These include nine case-control studies [32, 33, 36, 38-41, 44, 45] and the most recent study belonging to the prospective cohort, the AHS [37].…”

“…Six studies assessed exposure among the general population [32,36,39,40,44,45], while four studies were concerned with occupational exposure that included farmers [33,38,41] and licensed pesticide applicators [37]. As regards the methodologies applied for quantification of exposure, half of the included studies [32,39,40,44,45] estimated OR for PC in relation to plasma levels of a number of OCPs, all of which were conducted among the general population. One study [36] utilized adipose tissue biopsy that was taken from abdominal wall of cases and controls.…”

“…We included in the meta-analysis six population-based case-control studies [33,36,38,40,44,45], while three were clinic based [32,39,41]. For the AHS, individuals included were licensed pesticide applicators in Iowa and North Carolina that were either private applicators (farmers and nursery workers) or commercial applicators (employees of pest control companies) [37].…”

“…For the AHS, individuals included were licensed pesticide applicators in Iowa and North Carolina that were either private applicators (farmers and nursery workers) or commercial applicators (employees of pest control companies) [37]. Diagnosis of PC was based on cancer registries in case of four included casecontrol studies [33,38,40,45] and for the cohort study [37], while the other five studies depended directly on histopathologically confirmed specimens [32,36,39,41,44]. Four out of the included studies provided separate estimates for those developing aggressive forms of PC (metastatic cases) [37,40,44,45].…”

“…Regarding information bias, we expected it to be inevitable for studies that applied partially ecological designs due to lack of individualized exposure assessment [38,41]. On the other hand, we considered biological monitoring (measuring serum or adipose tissue level of OCPs) to provide an objective and direct approach of quantifying the internal burden of the pesticides taking into account individual variations [32,36,39,40,44,45].…”