Article

Prostate cancer and ambient pesticide exposure in agriculturally intensive areas in California.

Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1441 Eastlake Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90089-9175, USA.
American journal of epidemiology (Impact Factor: 4.98). 03/2011; 173(11):1280-8. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwr003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In a population-based case-control study in California's intensely agricultural Central Valley (2005-2006), the authors investigated relations between environmental pesticide/fungicide exposure and prostate cancer. Cases (n = 173) were obtained from a population-based cancer registry, and controls (n = 162) were obtained from Medicare listings and tax assessor mailings. Past ambient exposures to pesticides/fungicides were derived from residential history and independently recorded pesticide and land-use data, using a novel geographic information systems approach. In comparison with unexposed persons, increased risks of prostate cancer were observed among persons exposed to compounds which may have prostate-specific biologic effects (methyl bromide (odds ratio = 1.62, 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 2.59) and a group of organochlorines (odds ratio = 1.64, 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 2.63)) but not among those exposed to other compounds that were included as controls (simazine, maneb, and paraquat dichloride). The authors assessed the possibility of selection bias due to less-than-100% enrollment of eligible cases and controls (a critical methodological concern in studies of this kind) and determined that there was little evidence of bias affecting the estimated effect size. This study provides evidence of an association between prostate cancer and ambient pesticide exposures in and around homes in intensely agricultural areas. The associations appear specific to compounds with a plausible biologic role in prostate carcinogenesis.

0 Followers
 · 
97 Views
  • Source
    • "Residential exposure to pesticides has been linked to several adverse health outcomes, including adult cancers, such as non- Hodgkin lymphoma (Colt et al. 2006; Ward et al. 2009) and prostate cancer (Cockburn et al. 2011); childhood cancers, such as non- Hodgkin lymphoma, leukemia, and brain cancer (Infante-Rivard and Weichenthal 2007; Metayer and Buffler 2008; Van Maele- Fabry et al. 2011); and neurodevelopmental deficits (Bouchard et al. 2011; Engel et al. 2011; Rauh et al. 2011; Rosas and Eskenazi 2008). In epidemiologic studies of cancer, self-reported pesticide use is typically used to estimate residential pesticide exposure because of its low cost and participant burden (Ritz and Rull 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Residential pesticide exposure has been linked to adverse health outcomes in adults and children. High-quality exposure estimates are critical for confirming these associations. Past epidemiologic studies have used one measurement of pesticide concentrations in carpet dust to characterize an individual’s average long-term exposure. If concentrations vary over time, this approach could substantially misclassify exposure and attenuate risk estimates. Objectives: We assessed the repeatability of pesticide concentrations in carpet dust samples and the potential attenuation bias in epidemiologic studies relying on one sample. Methods: We collected repeated carpet dust samples (median = 3; range, 1–7) from 21 homes in Fresno County, California, during 2003–2005. Dust was analyzed for 13 pesticides using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. We used mixed-effects models to estimate between- and within-home variance. For each pesticide, we computed intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the estimated attenuation of regression coefficients in a hypothetical case–control study collecting a single dust sample. Results: The median ICC was 0.73 (range, 0.37–0.95), demonstrating higher between-home than within-home variability for most pesticides. The expected magnitude of attenuation bias associated with using a single dust sample was estimated to be ≤ 30% for 7 of the 13 compounds evaluated. Conclusions: For several pesticides studied, use of one dust sample to represent an exposure period of approximately 2 years would not be expected to substantially attenuate odds ratios. Further study is needed to determine if our findings hold for longer exposure periods and for other pesticides.
    Environmental Health Perspectives 05/2013; 121(5). DOI:10.1289/ehp.1205811 · 7.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The study by Sharpe et al. (2001) suggests that pesticide exposure might be more relevant among people exposed during leisure rather than when farming. Some studies indicate an increased risk of prostate cancer with occupational pesticide exposure (e.g., Strom, Yamamura, Flores-Sandoval, Pettaway, & Lopez, 2008), whereas others show no association (Cockburn et al., 2011; Fritschi, Glass, Tabrizi, Leavy, & Ambrosini, 2007; Kumar et al., 2010), and similarly in these studies specific occupational exposure was not defined. It is possible that subjects exposed to pesticides during leisure take fewer precautions than subjects who use pesticides in the workplace. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer is the leading cancer type diagnosed in American men and is the second leading cancer diagnosed in men worldwide. Although studies have been conducted to investigate the association between prostate cancer and exposure to pesticides and/or farming, the results have been inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis to summarize the association of farming and prostate cancer. The PubMed database was searched to identify all published case-control studies that evaluated farming as an occupational exposure by questionnaire or interview and prostate cancer. Ten published and two unpublished studies were included in this analysis, yielding 3,978 cases and 7,393 controls. Prostate cancer cases were almost four times more likely to be farmers compared with controls with benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH; meta odds ratio [OR], crude = 3.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.96-7.48, Q-test p value = .352; two studies); similar results were obtained when non-BPH controls were considered, but with moderate heterogeneity between studies (meta OR crude = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.16-1.64, Q-test p value = .216, I(2) = 31% [95% CI = 0-73]; five studies). Reported pesticide exposure was inversely associated with prostate cancer (meta OR crude = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.49-0.96, Q-test p value = .331; four studies), whereas no association with exposure to fertilizers was observed. Our findings confirm that farming is a risk factor for prostate cancer, but this increased risk may not be due to exposure to pesticides.
    American journal of men's health 09/2012; 7(2). DOI:10.1177/1557988312458792 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Humans are often exposed to a variety of pollutants that contribute to an individual's risk for diseases including cancer. Animal, cell cultures and epidemiological lines of evidence demonstrate that exposure to various environmental pollutants including pesticides are associated with increasing frequency of cancers. Organophosphates, organochlorines, carbamates, pyrethroids, the major groups of pesticides, have been reported to be carcinogenic in various models. However, the results of these studies are still controversial, nevertheless, their mechanism of action is clear. Therefore, new strategies in toxicological research are needed for efficient screening for adverse effects of pesticides on complex living systems. Biomarkers can be employed to identify causal associations and to make better quantitative and qualitative estimates of those associations at relevant levels of exposure. This will enable us to deepen our understanding of mechanism behind their carcinogenic potential. Deciphering the associations between pesticide exposure and cancer, following toxicoproteomics application, will be useful in the development of potential predictive biomarkers of pesticide induced carcinogenicity. Therefore, the thrust of this article was to review the risk of cancer due to pesticide exposure and significant toxicoproteomic-based studies conducted so far, to identify the novel molecules as possible biomarkers for cancer following pesticide exposure.
    Journal of proteomics 11/2011; 74(12):2713-22. DOI:10.1016/j.jprot.2011.09.024 · 3.93 Impact Factor
Show more

Preview

Download
1 Download
Available from