Does the association of prostate cancer with night-shift work differ according to rotating vs. fixed schedule? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mâncio, Jennifer; Leal, Cátia; Ferreira, Marta S.; Norton, Pedro; Lunet, Nuno

doi:10.1038/s41391-018-0040-2

Cited by 36 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our dose-response analysis demonstrated that every extra year of shift work is causing a significant increase of 2% of melanoma. Similar results were demonstrated in several studies that showed higher risks of colorectal, breast, lung and prostate cancers with an increased duration of shift work [26][27][28][29][30][31][32] . The results presented herein, together with the findings of the previously mentioned studies, suggest that longer exposure to shift work increases the risks of different types of cancers.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Shift work and risk of skin cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yousef

Mitwally

Noufal

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shift work with circadian disruption has been considered as a carcinogenic risk factor for skin cancer. the few prior studies that investigated the association between shift work and skin cancer have inconclusive results. our main objective was to evaluate the associations between shift work and the risks of different types of skin cancer. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Science Direct until October 2018 for studies that included a relationship between shift work and skin cancer. Our search yielded 193 articles and 9 studies met the criteria for our review. The included studies involved 3,579,147 participants and 17,308 skin cancer cases. Overall, ever shift work, was associated with increased risk of melanoma (RR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.05-1.16) and a significant decrease in the risk of BCC (RR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.88-0.93). No association between shift work and the risk of SCC was detected. Interestingly, our dose response analysis demonstrated that the risk of melanoma cumulatively increases by 2% for every year of shift work (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 1.00-1.03). In conclusion, shift work is associated with increased risk of melanoma and deceased risk of BCC. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings and to elucidate the related potential biological mechanisms. Shift work is increasingly common, especially in industrially developed countries. It includes a wide range of schedules, such as evening work; night work; split, extended or rotating shifts; weekend work; and on-call work 1,2. According to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labour Statistics, approximately 15 million Americans work night shifts, and that number is expected to grow rapidly 3. Although such work imposes significant costs on workers, including many hazardous impacts not only on their relationships, social lives and sleep patterns but also on their overall health, it is unavoidable and is taken for granted by many companies. Indeed, the International Agency for Research in Cancer (IARC) considered shift work that involves circadian disruption to be a probable carcinogenic factor in humans (Group 2 A carcinogen) 4. The desynchronization that occurs in circadian rhythms with respect to sleep cycles and melatonin production predisposes employees to have a higher susceptibility to cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric and endocrine disorders and to the development of neoplastic growths 5. A recent meta-analysis showed that shift work increases the risks of multiple primary cancers, such as breast, prostate and digestive system cancers 6. According to the last annual report by the Skin Cancer Foundation, skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the USA 7. It can be classified into melanoma skin cancer, basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). The last two subtypes are grouped together as non-melanoma skin cancer which is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in white populations 8. Both BCC and SCC have a good prognosis when detected in their early stages. While most n...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Shift work and risk of skin cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yousef

Mitwally

Noufal

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among those articles, 41 (85%) used shift work as the exposure, and 12 (25%) used long work hours. The articles covered the following outcomes: cancers [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] (16, 33%), cardiovascular disease [33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] (9, 19%), metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus, and obesity [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] (9, 19%), complications of pregnancy [51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58] (8, 17%), depression [43,45,59] (4, 8%), hypertension [60] (1, 2%), and injuries [61] (1, 2%). Some conditions we identified to be chronic or high cost (e.g.…”

Section: Overview Of Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shift work and long work hours and their association with chronic health conditions: A systematic review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Previous reviews have demonstrated that shift work and long work hours are associated with increased risk for chronic conditions. However, these reviews did not comprehensively assessed the body of evidence, and some were not conducted in a systematic manner. A better understanding of the health consequences of shift work and long work hours will aid in creating policy and practice recommendations. This review revisits the epidemiologic evidence on the association of shift work and long work hours with chronic conditions with particular emphasis on assessing the quality of the evidence. Methods and findings We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SR-MA) that assessed the link between shift work or long work hours and chronic conditions (PROS-PERO CRD42019122084). We evaluated the risk of bias of each SR-MA using AMSTAR v2 and assessed the overall evidence for each condition using the GRADE approach. We included 48 reviews covering cancers, cardiovascular diseases, metabolic syndrome and related conditions, pregnancy complications, depression, hypertension, and injuries. On average, only 7 of 16 AMSTAR items were fulfilled. Few SR-MAs had a registered protocol and nearly all failed to conduct a comprehensive search. We found moderate grade evidence linking shift work to breast cancer and long work hours to stroke. We found low grade evidence linking both shift work and long work hours with low to moderate increase in risk for some pregnancy complications and cardiovascular diseases. Low grade evidence also link long work hours and depression. Conclusions Moderate grade evidence suggest that shift work and long work hours increase the risk of breast cancer and stroke, but the evidence is unclear on other chronic conditions. There is a

show abstract

“…However, summary measurements must be considered with caution, due to the high heterogeneity found, the high proportion of studies with low-medium methodological quality, and the possibility of publication bias. As we have previously mentioned, other authors have also tried to summarize available evidence [27][28][29][30][31][32][33], as shown in online Supplementary Table S1.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From an epidemiological perspective, a number of observational studies have tried to evaluate the association between shift work and prostate cancer, although their results do not always point in the same direction [25,26]. This has led to the conduction of several reviews and meta-analyses on this topic, albeit again with inconsistent results [27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. A detailed analysis reveals that they have significant methodological weaknesses, such as high unexplained heterogeneity [28], partial inclusion of the evidence due to restrictions based on study design [27] or type of exposure (i.e., restricted to permanent night jobs), or the absence of consideration of potential publication bias [32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Briefly, some reviews did not include different designs but cohort studies [27], however, it has been suggested that well designed case-control studies may provide more evidence than cohort studies with poor control of biases [34]. Other studies did not consider rotating work as exposure variable [29][30][31]. The consideration of only fixed-night work as exposure explains the lower number of studies included in these reviews, although the IARC considered rotating work among circadian cycle disruptors [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shift Work and Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rivera-Izquierdo

Martínez-Ruiz

Castillo-Ruiz

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Agency of Research in Cancer (IARC) has recently confirmed shift work as a type 2A carcinogen. The results presented in published epidemiological studies regarding prostate cancer are inconsistent and the association remains controversial. The aims of this study were: (a) to investigate the possible association between shift work and prostate cancer incidence, identifying possible sources of heterogeneity; and (b) to analyze the potential effect of publication bias. A search for cohort and case-control studies published from January 1980 to November 2019 was conducted. The quality of the articles was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Pooled OR were calculated using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran’s Q test and data were stratified by potential sources of heterogeneity. Publication bias was analyzed. Eighteen studies were included. No association was found between rotating/night-shift work and prostate cancer, pooled OR 1.07 (95%CI 0.99 to 1.15), I2 = 45.7%, p = 0.016. Heterogeneity was eliminated when only cohort studies (pooled OR 1.03; 95%CI 0.96 to 1.10; I2 = 18.9%, p = 0.264) or high-quality studies (pooled OR 0.99; 95%CI 0.89 to 1.08; I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.571) were considered. A publication bias was detected. An association between shift work and prostate cancer cannot be confirmed with the available current data. Future analytical studies assessing more objective homogeneous exposure variables still seem necessary.

show abstract

Does the association of prostate cancer with night-shift work differ according to rotating vs. fixed schedule? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 36 publications

References 36 publications

Shift work and risk of skin cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Shift work and risk of skin cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Shift work and long work hours and their association with chronic health conditions: A systematic review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses

Shift Work and Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About