Search

Objectives: In Italy, asbestos was used intensively until its ban in 1992, which was extended for asbestos cement factories until 1994. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dose–response between asbestos exposure and asbestosis mortality across a pool of Italian occupational cohorts, taking into account the presence of competing risks. Methods: Cohorts were followed for vital status and the cause of death was ascertained by a linkage with mortality registers. Cause‐specific (CS) Cox‐regression models were used to evaluate the dose‐exposure relationship between asbestosis mortality and the time‐dependent cumulative exposure index (CEI) to asbestos. Fine and Gray regression models were computed to assess the effect of competing risks of death. Results: The cohort included 12,963 asbestos cement workers. During the follow‐up period (1960−2012), of a total of 6961 deaths, we observed 416 deaths attributed to asbestosis, 879 to lung cancer, 400 to primary pleural cancer, 135 to peritoneal cancer, and 1825 to diseases of the circulatory system. The CS model showed a strong association between CEI and asbestosis mortality. Dose–response models estimated an increasing trend in mortality even below a CEI of 25 ff/mL‐years. Lung cancer and circulatory diseases were the main competing causes of death. Conclusions: Asbestos exposure among Italian asbestos‐cement workers has led to a very high number of deaths from asbestosis and asbestos‐related diseases. The increasing risk trend associated with excess deaths, even at low exposure levels, suggests that the proposed limit values would not have been adequate to prevent disability and mortality from asbestosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this population‐based study was to evaluate the impact of being a cancer survivor (CS) on COVID‐19 risk and prognosis during the first wave of the pandemic (27 February 2020 to 13 May 2020) in Reggio Emilia Province. Prevalent cancer cases diagnosed between 1996 and 2019 were linked with the provincial COVID‐19 surveillance system. We compared CS' cumulative incidence of being tested, testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), being hospitalized and dying of COVID‐19 with that of the general population; we compared COVID‐19 prognosis in CS and in patients without cancer. During the study period, 15 391 people (1527 CS) underwent real‐time polymerase chain reaction for SARS‐CoV‐2, of whom 4541 (447 CS) tested positive; 541 (113 CS) died of COVID‐19. CS had higher age‐ and sex‐adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) of testing (1.28 [95% confidence interval, CI = 1.21‐1.35]), of positive test (IRR 1.06 [95% CI = 0.96‐1.18]) and of hospitalization and death (IRR 1.27 [95% CI = 1.09‐1.48] and 1.39 [95%CI = 1.12‐1.71], respectively). CS had worse prognosis when diagnosed with COVID‐19, particularly those below age 70 (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of death 5.03; [95% CI = 2.59‐9.75]), while the OR decreased after age 70. The OR of death was higher for CS with a recent diagnosis, that is, <2 years (OR = 2.92; 95% CI = 1.64‐5.21), or metastases (OR = 2.09; 95% CI = 0.88‐4.93). CS showed the same probability of being infected, despite a slightly higher probability of being tested than the general population. Nevertheless, CS were at higher risk of death once infected. What's new Immunosuppressed status caused by cancer or cancer treatment has been suggested to increase the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and worse outcomes in cancer patients compared to the general population. This study in an Italian province with a high tumour incidence rate that saw a high cumulative COVID‐19 incidence found that, during the first wave, the cumulative incidence of COVID‐19 in cancer survivors was similar to that in the general population, despite their slightly higher probability of being tested. Cancer survivors had a greater risk of hospitalisation and death once infected, especially if aged <70 years or recently diagnosed with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the impact of faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening on stage distribution at diagnosis, and to estimate relative incidence rates by stage in screened at first and subsequent rounds vs. unscreened. We included all incident cases occurring in 2000–2008 in 50‐ to 71‐year‐olds residing in areas with an FIT‐screening programme. Multinomial logistic models were computed to estimate the relative risk ratio (RRR) of stages I and IV, compared to stage II + III, adjusting for age, sex, geographical area, and incidence year. Proportions were then used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) by stage for screened subjects at the first and at subsequent rounds vs. unscreened subjects, applying the expected changes in overall incidence during screening phases. 11,663 cancers were included: 5965 in not‐invited and 5,698 in invited subjects, 3,425 of whom attendees. Compared to not‐invited, invited subjects had RRR 2.04 (95% CI: 1.84; 2.46) of stage I and RRR 0.77 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.87) of stage IV. Differences were stronger comparing attendees vs. nonattendees. Interval cancers were more frequently stage I compared to non‐invited (RRR 1.54; 95% CI: 1.15; 2.04), but there was no difference for stage IV. IRRs in screened at first round vs. unscreened were 4.6 (95% CI: 4.2; 5.1), 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3; 1.5) and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.6; 0.9) for stages I, II + III and IV, respectively; in the following rounds the IRRs of screened vs. unscreened were 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2; 1.6), 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7; 0.9) and 0.3 (95% CI: 0.1; 0.4) for stages I, II + III and IV, respectively. FIT screening reduces the incidence of metastatic cancers by about 70% after the first round. What's new? Screening programs are intended to reduce mortality by early diagnosis. In this study, the authors evaluated the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer. They calculated the effect of FIT screening on stage at diagnosis, and estimated the relative incidence rates by stage. Individuals who attended screening had far higher incidence of stage I cancer, and lower incidence of stage IV, than those not screened. Metastatic cancer incidence, they found, decreased by about 70% at the first round of screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]