9 results on '"Kriebel, David"'
Search Results
2. Risk of mesothelioma following external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a cohort analysis of SEER database
- Author
-
Farioli, Andrea, Violante, Francesco Saverio, Mattioli, Stefano, Curti, Stefania, and Kriebel, David
- Published
- 2013
3. Carcinogen File: The Ames Test.
- Author
-
Kendall, Jim and Kriebel, David
- Abstract
This test measures the capability of a chemical substance to cause mutations in special strains of the bacterium Salmonella. It is quick, taking only forty-eight hours, inexpensive, and reliable. (BB)
- Published
- 1979
4. Registry-based case—control studies of liver cancer and cancers of the biliary tract nested in a cohort of autoworkers exposed to metalworking fluids
- Author
-
Bardin, Judith A, Gore, Rebecca J, Wegman, David H, Kriebel, David, Woskie, Susan R, and Eisen, Ellen A
- Published
- 2005
5. Cancer rates not explained by smoking: a county-level analysis.
- Author
-
Myers, Douglas J., Hoppin, Polly, Jacobs, Molly, Clapp, Richard, and Kriebel, David
- Subjects
SMOKING prevention ,SMOKING cessation ,SMOKING ,SEX discrimination against women ,CANCER ,CANCER prevention ,HABIT breaking - Abstract
Background: Debates over the importance of "lifestyle" versus "environment" contributions to cancer have been going on for over 40 years. While it is clear that cigarette smoking is the most significant cancer risk factor, the contributions of occupational and environmental carcinogens in air, water and food remain controversial. In practice, most cancer prevention messaging focuses on reducing cigarette smoking and changing other personal behaviors with little mention of environmental chemicals, despite widespread exposure to many known carcinogens. To inform decision-making on cancer prevention priorities, we evaluated the potential impact of smoking cessation on cancer rates.Methods: Using cancer incidence data from 612 counties in the SEER database, and county-level smoking prevalences, we investigated the impact of smoking cessation on incidence for 12 smoking-related cancer types, 2006-2016. A multilevel mixed-effects regression model quantified the association between county-level smoking prevalence and cancer incidence, adjusting for age, gender and variability over time and among counties. We simulated complete smoking cessation and estimated the effects on county-level cancer rates.Results: Regression models showed the expected strong association between smoking prevalence and cancer incidence. Simulating complete smoking cessation, the incidence of the 12 smoking-related cancer types fell by 39.8% (54.9% for airways cancers; 28.9% for non-airways cancers). And, while the actual rates of smoking-related cancers from 2006 to 2016 declined (annual percent change (APC) = - 0.8, 95% CI = - 1.0 to - 0.5%), under the scenario of smoking elimination, the trend in cancer incidence at these sites was not declining (APC = - 0.1, 95% CI = - 0.4 to + 0.1%). Not all counties were predicted to benefit equally from smoking elimination, and cancer rates would fall less than 10% in some counties.Conclusions: Smoking prevention has produced dramatic reductions in cancer in the US for 12 major types. However, we estimate that eliminating smoking completely would not affect about 60% of cancer cases of the 12 smoking-related types, leaving no improvement in the incidence trend from 2006 to 2016. We conclude that cancer prevention strategies should focus not only on lifestyle changes but also the likely contributions of the full range of risk factors, including environmental/occupational carcinogens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. The IARC Monographs: Updated Procedures for Modern and Transparent Evidence Synthesis in Cancer Hazard Identification.
- Author
-
Samet, Jonathan M, Chiu, Weihsueh A, Cogliano, Vincent, Jinot, Jennifer, Kriebel, David, Lunn, Ruth M, Beland, Frederick A, Bero, Lisa, Browne, Patience, Fritschi, Lin, Kanno, Jun, Lachenmeier, Dirk W, Lan, Qing, Lasfargues, Gérard, Curieux, Frank Le, Peters, Susan, Shubat, Pamela, Sone, Hideko, White, Mary C, and Williamson, Jon
- Subjects
LABORATORY animals ,EVIDENCE ,CANCER prevention ,HAZARDS ,CANCER ,TUMOR prevention ,PUBLIC health surveillance ,RESEARCH ,CARCINOGENS ,EVALUATION of human services programs ,MOTIVATION (Psychology) ,RESEARCH methodology ,EVALUATION research ,MEDICAL cooperation ,COMPARATIVE studies ,RESEARCH funding ,INTERNATIONAL agencies ,CHEMICAL inhibitors - Abstract
The Monographs produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) apply rigorous procedures for the scientific review and evaluation of carcinogenic hazards by independent experts. The Preamble to the IARC Monographs, which outlines these procedures, was updated in 2019, following recommendations of a 2018 expert advisory group. This article presents the key features of the updated Preamble, a major milestone that will enable IARC to take advantage of recent scientific and procedural advances made during the 12 years since the last Preamble amendments. The updated Preamble formalizes important developments already being pioneered in the Monographs program. These developments were taken forward in a clarified and strengthened process for identifying, reviewing, evaluating, and integrating evidence to identify causes of human cancer. The advancements adopted include the strengthening of systematic review methodologies; greater emphasis on mechanistic evidence, based on key characteristics of carcinogens; greater consideration of quality and informativeness in the critical evaluation of epidemiological studies, including their exposure assessment methods; improved harmonization of evaluation criteria for the different evidence streams; and a single-step process of integrating evidence on cancer in humans, cancer in experimental animals, and mechanisms for reaching overall evaluations. In all, the updated Preamble underpins a stronger and more transparent method for the identification of carcinogenic hazards, the essential first step in cancer prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. IARC Monographs : 40 Years of Evaluating Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans
- Author
-
Pearce, Neil E, Blair, Aaron, Vineis, Paolo, Ahrens, Wolfgang, Andersen, Aage, Anto, Josep M, Armstrong, Bruce K, Baccarelli, Andrea A, Beland, Frederick A, Berrington, Amy, Bertazzi, Pier A, Birnbaum, Linda S, Brownson, Ross C, Bucher, John R, Cantor, Kenneth P, Cardis, Elisabeth, Cherrie, John W, Christiani, David C, Cocco, Pierluigi, Coggon, David, Comba, Pietro, Demers, Paul A, Dement, John M, Douwes, Jeroen, Eisen, Ellen A, Engel, Lawrence S, Fenske, Richard A, Fleming, Lora E, Fletcher, Tony, Fontham, Elizabeth, Forastiere, Francesco, Frentzel-Beyme, Rainer, Fritschi, Lin, Gerin, Michel, Goldberg, Marcel, Grandjean, Philippe, Grimsrud, Tom K, Gustavsson, Per, Haines, Andy, Hartge, Patricia, Hansen, Johnni, Hauptmann, Michael, Heederik, Dick, Hemminki, Kari, Hemon, Denis, Hertz-Picciotto, Irva, Hoppin, Jane A, Huff, James, Jarvholm, Bengt, Kang, Daehee, Karagas, Margaret R, Kjaerheim, Kristina, Kjuus, Helge, Kogevinas, Manolis, Kriebel, David, Kristensen, Petter, Kromhout, Hans, Laden, Francine, Lebailly, Pierre, LeMasters, Grace, Lubin, Jay H, Lynch, Charles F, Lynge, Elsebeth, 't Mannetje, Andrea, McMichael, Anthony J, McLaughlin, John R, Marrett, Loraine, Martuzzi, Marco, Merchant, James A, Merler, Enzo, Merletti, Franco, Miller, Anthony, Mirer, Franklin E, Monson, Richard, Nordby, Karl-Kristian, Olshan, Andrew F, Parent, Marie-Elise, Perera, Frederica P, Perry, Melissa J, Pesatori, Angela C, Pirastu, Roberta, Porta, Miquel, Pukkala, Eero, Rice, Carol, Richardson, David B, Ritter, Leonard, Ritz, Beate, Ronckers, Cecile M, Rushton, Lesley, Rusiecki, Jennifer A, Rusyn, Ivan, Samet, Jonathan M, Sandler, Dale P, de Sanjose, Silvia, Schernhammer, Eva, Seniori Constantini, Adele, Seixas, Noah, Shy, Carl, Siemiatycki, Jack, Silvermann, Debra T, Simonato, Lorenzo, Smith, Allan H, Smith, Martyn T, Spinelli, John J, Spitz, Margaret R, Stallones, Lorann, Stayner, Leslie T, Steenland, Kyle, Stenzel, Mark, Stewart, Bernard W, Stewart, Patricia A, Symanski, Elaine, Terracini, Benedetto, Tolbert, Paige E, Vainio, Harri, Vena, John, Vermeulen, Roel, Victora, Cesar G, Ward, Elizabeth M, Weinberg, Clarice R, Weisenburger, Dennis, Wesseling, Catharina, Weiderpass, Elisabete, Zahm, Shelia H, Risk Assessment, Infection & Immunity, dIRAS RA-I&I RA, dIRAS RA-2, LS IRAS EEPI GRA (Gezh.risico-analyse), LS IRAS EEPI EXAS (Arb.hyg+bl.st.kar.), CCA -Cancer Center Amsterdam, APH - Amsterdam Public Health, Paediatric Oncology, The University of Sydney, CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Universita degli Studi di Cagliari [Cagliari], Cohortes épidémiologiques en population (CONSTANCES), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Université Paris-Saclay-Université de Paris (UP), Centre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique Sorbonne Paris Cité (CRESS (U1153 / UMR_A_1125 / UMR_S_1153)), Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 (UPD7)-Université Sorbonne Paris Cité (USPC)-Université Paris Descartes - Paris 5 (UPD5)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Universitat Pompeu Fabra [Barcelona] (UPF)-Catalunya ministerio de salud, Université de Caen Normandie (UNICAEN), Normandie Université (NU), Institut Armand Frappier (INRS-IAF), Réseau International des Instituts Pasteur (RIIP)-Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique [Québec] (INRS), Movement Disorders and Tourette Centre, Rockefeller University [New York], Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal (UdeM), Plymouth University, Siemens [New York], Siemens AG [Munich], Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (MEB), Karolinska Institutet [Stockholm], Population-Based Epidemiological Cohorts, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-AP-HP Hôpital Paul Brousse, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 (UPD7)-Université Paris Descartes - Paris 5 (UPD5)-Université Sorbonne Paris Cité (USPC)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Universitat Pompeu Fabra [Barcelona]-Catalunya ministerio de salud, Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique [Québec] (INRS)-Réseau International des Instituts Pasteur (RIIP), Rockefeller University, Risk Assessment, Infection & Immunity, dIRAS RA-I&I RA, dIRAS RA-2, LS IRAS EEPI GRA (Gezh.risico-analyse), LS IRAS EEPI EXAS (Arb.hyg+bl.st.kar.), Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 (UPD7)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)-Université Paris Descartes - Paris 5 (UPD5)-Université Sorbonne Paris Cité (USPC), The University of Sydney [Sydney], Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines ( UVSQ ) -Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale ( INSERM ) -AP-HP Hôpital Paul Brousse, Centre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique Sorbonne Paris Cité ( CRESS (U1153 / UMR_A 1125) ), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique ( INRA ) -Université Sorbonne Paris Cité ( USPC ) -Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale ( INSERM ), Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology ( CREAL ), Université de Caen Normandie ( UNICAEN ), Normandie Université ( NU ), Institut Armand Frappier ( INRS-IAF ), Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique [Québec] ( INRS ) -Réseau International des Instituts Pasteur ( RIIP ) -Institut Armand Frappier, Rockefeller University, New York, Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal ( CRCHUM ), and Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics ( MEB )
- Subjects
Pathology ,Biomedical Research ,Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis ,[SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio] ,05 Environmental Sciences ,Toxicology ,MESH: Carcinogens, Environmental ,0302 clinical medicine ,CANCER-EPIDEMIOLOGY ,Neoplasms ,Epidemiology of cancer ,PLEA ,PROGRAM ,Medicine ,MESH: Neoplasms ,Càncer ,health care economics and organizations ,Public, Environmental & Occupational Health ,Cancer ,0303 health sciences ,Publications ,11 Medical And Health Sciences ,MESH : Publications ,POLICY ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,PUBLIC-HEALTH ,Public Health ,MESH: Public Health ,MESH : Biomedical Research ,Life Sciences & Biomedicine ,International agency ,medicine.medical_specialty ,MESH : Public Health ,education ,MESH : International Agencies ,Environmental Sciences & Ecology ,macromolecular substances ,MESH: Publications ,MESH : Carcinogens, Environmental ,MESH: International Agencies ,03 medical and health sciences ,Arbetsmedicin och miljömedicin ,ADHERENCE ,Environmental health ,Humans ,VDP::Medisinske Fag: 700 ,030304 developmental biology ,Science & Technology ,MESH: Humans ,[ SDV ] Life Sciences [q-bio] ,business.industry ,MESH: Biomedical Research ,MESH : Humans ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,RECIPE ,International Agencies ,PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING SCIENCE ,Occupational Health and Environmental Health ,MESH : Neoplasms ,Carcinogens, Environmental ,VDP::Medical disciplines: 700 ,Commentary ,business ,FALSE ,Cancerígens ,Environmental Sciences ,EPIDEMIOLOGIC ENTERPRISE - Abstract
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 K, Stenzel M, Stewart BW, Stewart PA, Symanski E, Terracini B, Tolbert PE, Vainio H, Vena J, Vermeulen R, Victora CG, Ward EM, Weinberg CR, Weisenburger D, Wesseling C, Weiderpass E, Zahm SH. 2015. IARC Monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans. Environ Health Perspect 123:507-514; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409149.
- Published
- 2015
8. The increasing toll of adolescent cancer incidence in the US.
- Author
-
Burkhamer, Jessica, Kriebel, David, and Clapp, Richard
- Subjects
- *
CANCER in adolescence , *CANCER , *ETIOLOGY of cancer , *EPIDEMIOLOGY of cancer , *CANCER treatment - Abstract
Cancer incidence is rising among adolescents (“teens”). The causes of the increase are unknown but studying incidence patterns and trends may produce insights into etiology. Using data from the US National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program we described trends of cancer incidence among teens (15–19 year olds). We reviewed and summarized incidence patterns for histologic cancer groups and the most frequently diagnosed sites of cancer among teens during 2008–2012 reported by the SEER Cancer Statistics Review. We calculated annual incidence rates for the years 1975–2012 and used linear regression analysis to evaluate trends and calculate rates of change. Incidence for all sites combined increased annually by 0.67% for males and 0.62% for females during the period 1975 through 2012 –resulting in more than a 25% increase over 38 years. The biggest annual incidence increases occurred in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) (2.16% females; 1.38% males), thyroid cancer (2.12% females; 1.59% males), acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (1.73% females) and testicular cancer (1.55% males). Incidence rates for most histologic groups and sites showed steady long term increases over the 38 years of data. Despite improvements in survival, rising incidence trends mean growing numbers of young adults are undergoing painful and costly cancer treatments. A concerted research program is vital to investigate causes of steadily rising teen cancer rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
9. Cancer Incidence Among Male Massachusetts Firefighters, 1987-2003.
- Author
-
Dongmug Kang, Davis, Letitia K., Hunt, Phillip, and Kriebel, David
- Subjects
FIRE fighters ,CARCINOGENS ,POLICE ,CANCER ,CANCER education ,OCCUPATIONS ,HAZARDOUS substances ,TOXINS - Abstract
This article presents a study regarding cancer incidence among male firefighters in Massachusetts from 1987 to 2003. The study aims to investigate the elevated risks of various types of cancers in firefighters because firefighters are known to be exposed to recognizable or probable carcinogens. Standardized morbidity odds ratio were employed to examine the cancer risk in white, male firefighters compared to police and all other occupations recorded in the Massachusetts Cancer Registry from 1986 to 2003.
- Published
- 2008
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.