Lead (Pb) in biological samples in association with cancer risk and mortality: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Lead (Pb) is a toxic heavy metal and pervasive environmental contaminant, and a class 2 A carcinogen according to the IARC classification, yet its link with cancer at several body sites remains uncertain. Here, we aimed at summarizing the scientific evidence regarding its association with cancer risk and mortality, focusing on studies that carried out Pb measurements in biological samples. METHODS: We reviewed articles published in PubMed and EMBASE until January 2nd, 2024, that quantified the epidemiological association between Pb measured in blood, urine, nails, and other biological media, and cancer risk and mortality (overall and by cancer site/type). RESULTS: We included 46 articles (out of 8022 screened) published in 1995-2023 and reporting on investigations conducted in fifteen countries. In terms of design, 20 were prospective, 24 were retrospective case-control studies, and 2 were cross-sectional. Pb levels were determined in blood in the majority of studies (n=28). The most consistent evidence was for the association of Pb with cancer of the gastrointestinal tract, particularly the oesophagus, stomach (RR ranging from 0.80 to 2.66), colon-rectum, and pancreas; and of the bladder and urinary tract (RR from 1.10 to 2.89). For other specific malignancies, the data were conflicting or too limited to draw reliable conclusions. Finally, increased Pb concentration in blood and urine was consistently associated with higher overall cancer incidence and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Lead is a widespread and highly persistent environmental pollutant associated with cancer at multiple body sites. Comprehensive primary prevention interventions aiming at reducing opportunities for Pb exposure need to be continuously promoted and implemented.

Cadmium in biological samples and site-specific cancer risk and mortality: A systematic review of original articles and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Cadmium (Cd) is classified as a class 1 carcinogen by the IARC, yet uncertainty persists regarding the total burden of cancer (incidence and mortality) caused by exposure to it, due to the still limited evidence with regard to its aetiological role in cancer at several body sites. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE for meta-analyses and original articles published by February 1st, 2024, that focused on the link between cadmium measured in biological samples (blood, urine, finger-/toe-nails, and hair) and site-specific cancer risk and mortality. RESULTS: We included 9 meta-analyses and 57 original articles (of these, the design was retrospective in 38 and prospective in 19, and Cd levels were quantified in blood, n=33, urine, n=19, both blood and urine, n=2, or finger-/toenail, n=3). Current data consistently suggest a causal role of exposure to cadmium in pancreas, lung, and bladder carcinogenesis. Total cancer risk and mortality are also positively correlated with Cd levels in biological samples. The evidence is weak or inconclusive for the remaining cancer sites (including breast and prostate), mostly due to the limited number of studies available to date and/or methodological limitations. DISCUSSION: Exposure to cadmium poses a risk for increased cancer incidence and mortality. Cadmium-related cancer burden might indeed be currently underestimated, as the amount of available evidence for most cancer sites and types is currently limited, and more research in the field is warranted. Continuing efforts to contain Cd pollution and mitigate associated health risk are also needed.

Impact of fosaprepitant in the prevention of nausea and emesis in head and neck cancer patients undergoing cisplatin-based chemoradiation: a pilot prospective study and a review of literature.

PURPOSE: Cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is standard treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). However, IMRT may increase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of fosaprepitant in preventing CINV. METHODS: An infusion of 150 mg fosaprepitant was given through a 30 min. We assessed acute toxicity using CTCAE v.4 and the incidence of CINV using the FLIE questionnaire. The evaluation of CINV was done at the second and fifth weeks of CRT and 1 week after the end. The EORTC QLQ-HN 43 questionnaire was administered before treatment beginning (baseline), at second (T1) and fifth (T2) weeks. A dosimetric analysis was performed on dorsal nucleus of vagus (DVC) and area postrema (AP). RESULTS: Between March and November 2020, 24 patients were enrolled. No correlation was found between nausea and DVC mean dose (p = 0.573), and AP mean dose (p = 0.869). Based on the FLIE questionnaire, patients reported a mean score of 30.5 for nausea and 30 for vomiting during week 2 and 29.8 for nausea and 29.2 for vomiting during week 5. After treatment ended, the mean scores were 27.4 for nausea and 27.7 for vomiting. All patients completed the EORTC QLQ-HN 43. Significantly higher scores at T2 assessment than baseline were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The use of fosaprepitant in preventing CINV reduced incidence of moderate to severe nausea and vomiting. No correlation has been found between nausea and median dose to DVC and AP.

The Prognostic Impact of Quitting Smoking at or around Diagnosis on the Survival of Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Systematic Literature Review.

Cigarette smoking is a strong risk factor for the occurrence of gastrointestinal cancers, and a substantial proportion of newly diagnosed patients is made up of active smokers, yet the impact of smoking cessation at or around diagnosis on the clinical course of these cancers (whose prognosis is often unfavourable) has never been summarized to date. We reviewed studies published until 30 April 2022 that investigated whether smoking cessation at or around diagnosis favourably affects the clinical course of gastrointestinal cancers patients. Six studies were included for colorectal cancer patients, which provided limited yet suggestive evidence that quitters may have longer disease-specific survival compared to continued smokers. Only one study each focused on patients with gastric or HBV-positive liver cancer (both reporting a survival advantage for quitters vs. continued smokers), while we found no eligible studies for patients with cancer at other sites within the digestive system. More research is urgently needed to expand the evidence on the topic, given the potentially major clinical implications for these patients. Moreover, health professionals should provide the necessary smoking cessation support to any smoker who is undergoing diagnostic work-up or treatment for gastrointestinal cancer.