A UK framework for the assessment and integration of different scientific evidence streams in chemical risk assessment.

BACKGROUND: Few methods are available for transparently combining different evidence streams for chemical risk assessment to reach an integrated conclusion on the probability of causation. Hence, the UK Committees on Toxicity (COT) and on Carcinogenicity (COC) have reviewed current practice and developed guidance on how to achieve this in a transparent manner, using graphical visualisation. METHODS/APPROACH: All lines of evidence, including toxicological, epidemiological, new approach methodologies, and mode of action should be considered, taking account of their strengths/weaknesses in their relative weighting towards a conclusion on the probability of causation. A qualitative estimate of the probability of causation is plotted for each line of evidence and a combined estimate provided. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Guidance is provided on integration of multiple lines of evidence for causation, based on current best practice. Qualitative estimates of probability for each line of evidence are plotted graphically. This ensures a deliberative, consensus conclusion on likelihood of causation is reached. It also ensures clear communication of the influence of the different lines of evidence on the overall conclusion on causality. Issues on which advice from the respective Committees is sought varies considerably, hence the guidance is designed to be sufficiently flexible to meet this need.

Recognition of COVID-19 with occupational origin: a comparison between European countries.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to present an overview of the formal recognition of COVID-19 as occupational disease (OD) or injury (OI) across Europe. METHODS: A COVID-19 questionnaire was designed by a task group within COST-funded OMEGA-NET and sent to occupational health experts of 37 countries in WHO European region, with a last update in April 2022. RESULTS: The questionnaire was filled out by experts from 35 countries. There are large differences between national systems regarding the recognition of OD and OI: 40% of countries have a list system, 57% a mixed system and one country an open system. In most countries, COVID-19 can be recognised as an OD (57%). In four countries, COVID-19 can be recognised as OI (11%) and in seven countries as either OD or OI (20%). In two countries, there is no recognition possible to date. Thirty-two countries (91%) recognise COVID-19 as OD/OI among healthcare workers. Working in certain jobs is considered proof of occupational exposure in 25 countries, contact with a colleague with confirmed infection in 19 countries, and contact with clients with confirmed infection in 21 countries. In most countries (57%), a positive PCR test is considered proof of disease. The three most common compensation benefits for COVID-19 as OI/OD are disability pension, treatment and rehabilitation. Long COVID is included in 26 countries. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 can be recognised as OD or OI in 94% of the European countries completing this survey, across different social security and embedded occupational health systems.

Lessons Learned From Presumptive Condition Lists in Veteran Compensation Systems.

Presumptive condition lists formally accept connections between military factors and veteran health conditions. An environmental scan of such lists and their evidentiary basis was conducted across four veterans' administrations to inform other administrations considering the development of such lists. Information on included conditions, qualifying military factors, and scientific processes was obtained through targeted internet searches and correspondence with veterans' administrations. The content of presumptive condition lists across jurisdictions varied by conditions included, as well as military eligibility requirements (e.g., service in particular conflict, context, or time period). Scientific review processes to develop lists also varied across jurisdictions. Findings indicate that evidence and experience may be leveraged across compensation systems (veteran and civilian). Ongoing research to understand links between military exposures and veteran health is recommended.

Lifetime occupational exposures and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease risk in the UK Biobank cohort.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Occupational exposures are important, preventable causes of COPD. We previously found an increased risk of COPD among six occupations by analysing lifetime job histories and lung function data in the population-based UK Biobank cohort. We aimed to build on these findings and elucidate the underlying potential causal agents to focus preventive strategies. METHODS: We applied the ALOHA+job exposure matrix (JEM) based on the International Standard Classification of Occupations V.1988 codes, where exposure to 12 selected agents was rated as 0 (no exposure), 1 (low) or 2 (high). COPD was spirometrically defined as FEV1/FVC less than the lower limit of normal. We calculated semiquantitative cumulative exposure estimates for each agent by multiplying the duration of exposure and squared intensity. Prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% CI for COPD were estimated using robust Poisson regression adjusted for centre, sex, age, smoking and coexposure to JEM agents. Only associations confirmed among never-smokers and never-asthmatics were considered reliable. RESULTS: Out of 116 375 participants with complete job histories, 94 514 had acceptable/repeatable spirometry and smoking data and were included in the analysis. Pesticide exposure showed increased risk of COPD for ever exposure (PR=1.13, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.28) and high cumulative exposure (PR=1.32, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.56), with positive exposure-response trends (p trend=0.004), which were confirmed among never-smokers (p trend=0.005) and never-asthmatics (p trend=0.001). CONCLUSION: In a large population-based study, occupational exposure to pesticides was associated with risk of COPD. Focused preventive strategies for workers exposed to pesticides can prevent the associated COPD burden.

Health Impact of Environmental Tobacco Smoke in the Horne.

Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) can be a major constituent of air pollution in indoor environments, including the home. Regulation on smoking in the workplace and public places has made the home the dominant unregulated source of ETS, with important potential impacts on children. Between 40% and 60% of cbildren in the United Kingdom are exposed to ETS in the home. Many experimental and human and studies have investigated the adverse health effects of ETS. Substantial evidence shows that in adults ETS is associated with increased risk of chronic respiratory illness, including lung cancer, nasal cancer, and cardiovascular disease. In children, ETS increases the risk of sudden infant death syndrome, middle ear disease, lower respiratory tract illness, prevalence of wheeze and cough, and exacerbates asthma. Although banning smoking in the home would be the optimal reduction strategy, several barrier and ventilation methods can be effective. Nevertheless, such methods are not always practical or acceptable, particularly when social pressures contribute to a lack of support for ETS control in the home. Smoking cessation interventions have bad limited success. Research is needed to explore the barriers to adopting ETS risk-reducing behaviors.

Occupational exposure to inhaled pollutants and risk of airflow obstruction: a large UK population-based UK Biobank cohort.

BACKGROUND: Although around 10% to 15% of COPD burden can be attributed to workplace exposures, little is known about the role of different airborne occupational pollutants (AOP). The main aim of the study was to assess the effect size of the relationship between various AOP, their level and duration of exposure with airflow obstruction (AFO). METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted in 228 614 participants from the UK Biobank study who were assigned occupational exposure using a job exposure matrix blinded to health outcome. Adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% CI for the risk of AFO for ever and years of exposure to AOPs were estimated using robust Poisson model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for never-smokers, non-asthmatic and bi-pollutant model. RESULTS: Of 228 614 participants, 77 027 (33.7%) were exposed to at least one AOP form. 35.5% of the AFO cases were exposed to vapours, gases, dusts or fumes (VGDF) and 28.3% to dusts. High exposure to vapours increased the risk of occupational AFO by 26%. Exposure to dusts (adjusted PR=1.05; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.08), biological dusts (1.05; 1.01 to 1.10) and VGDF (1.04; 1.01 to 1.07) showed a significantly increased risk of AFO, however, statistically not significant following multiple testing. There was no significant increase in risk of AFO by duration (years) of exposure in current job. The results were null when restricted to never-smokers and when a bi-pollutant model was used. However, when data was analysed based on the level of exposure (low, medium and high) compared with no exposure, directionally there was increase in risk for those with high exposure to vapours, gases, fumes, mists and VGDF but statistically significant only for vapours. CONCLUSION: High exposure (in current job) to airborne occupational pollutants was suggestive of higher risk of AFO. Future studies should investigate the relationship between lifetime occupational exposures and COPD.

A behaviour change package to prevent hand dermatitis in nurses working in health care: the SCIN cluster RCT.

BACKGROUND: Although strategies have been developed to minimise the risk of occupational hand dermatitis in nurses, their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: The Skin Care Intervention in Nurses trial tested the hypothesis that a behaviour change package intervention, coupled with provision of hand moisturisers, could reduce the point prevalence of hand dermatitis when compared with standard care among nurses working in the NHS. The secondary aim was to assess the impact of the intervention on participants' beliefs and behaviour regarding hand care, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in comparison with normal care. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Thirty-five NHS hospital trusts/health boards/universities. PARTICIPANTS: First-year student nurses with a history of atopic tendency, and full-time intensive care unit nurses. INTERVENTION: Sites were randomly allocated to be 'intervention plus' or 'intervention light'. Participants at 'intervention plus' sites received access to a bespoke online behaviour change package intervention, coupled with personal supplies of moisturising cream (student nurses) and optimal availability of moisturising cream (intensive care unit nurses). Nurses at 'intervention light' sites received usual care, including a dermatitis prevention leaflet. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The difference between intervention plus and intervention light sites in the change of point prevalence of visible hand dermatitis was measured from images taken at baseline and at follow-up. RANDOMISATION: Fourteen sites were randomised to the intervention plus arm, and 21 sites were randomised to the intervention light arm. BLINDING: The participants, trial statistician, methodologist and the dermatologists interpreting the hand photographs were blinded to intervention assignment. NUMBERS ANALYSED: An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted on data from 845 student nurses and 1111 intensive care unit nurses. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis showed no evidence that the risk of developing dermatitis was greater in the intervention light group than in the intervention plus group (student nurses: odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 2.69; intensive care unit nurses: odds ratio 1.41, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 2.44). Both groups had high levels of baseline beliefs about the benefits of using hand moisturisers before, during and after work. The frequency of use of hand moisturisers before, during and after shifts was significantly higher in the intensive care unit nurses in the intervention plus arm at follow-up than in the comparator group nurses. For student nurses, the intervention plus group mean costs were £2 lower than those for the comparator and 0.00002 more quality-adjusted life-years were gained. For intensive care unit nurses, costs were £4 higher and 0.0016 fewer quality-adjusted life-years were gained. HARMS: No adverse events were reported. LIMITATIONS: Only 44.5% of participants in the intervention plus arm accessed the behaviour change package. CONCLUSION: The intervention did not result in a statistically significant decrease in the prevalence of hand dermatitis in the intervention plus group. FUTURE WORK: Participants had a high level of baseline beliefs about the importance of using hand moisturisers before, during and after work. Future research should focus on how workplace culture can be changed in order for that knowledge to be actioned. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53303171. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 58. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

This study was designed to prevent nurses from developing hand dermatitis (eczema). The study recruited student and intensive care unit nurses who were at high risk of hand dermatitis. Overall, 35 study sites took part. Each site was randomised to be in either the 'intervention plus' or the 'intervention light' group. Participants in the intervention plus sites received access to a web-based intervention to change nurses' behaviour to improve hand care together with a written leaflet with advice on how to prevent dermatitis. The student nurse participants in the intervention plus group were provided with personal supplies of hand moisturisers to use during their clinical placements and the study team ensured that the intensive care unit nurses in the intervention plus arm had access to moisturising creams on the wards. Those in the intervention light group received only the written leaflet with advice on how to prevent dermatitis. All participants were reminded to contact their occupational health service early on if they developed hand dermatitis during the study. The main aim was to see if there was a difference between the proportion of participants in the intervention plus and intervention light groups who had hand dermatitis at the beginning of the study and at the end. The study collected photographs of hands at the time of recruitment and after 12 months. Participants completed questionnaires about their skin. The results showed that there was no evidence that the risk of developing hand dermatitis in the intervention light group was greater than that in the intervention plus group.

The occupations at increased risk of COPD: analysis of lifetime job-histories in the population-based UK Biobank Cohort.

Occupational exposures are important, preventable causes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Identification of COPD high-risk jobs is key to focus preventive strategies, but a definitive job-list is unavailable.We addressed this issue by evaluating the association of lifetime job-histories and lung function data in the population-based UK Biobank cohort, whose unprecedented sample size allowed analyses restricted to never-smokers to rule out the most important confounder, tobacco smoking. COPD was spirometrically defined as forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity ratio below the lower limit of normal. Lifetime job-histories were collected via OSCAR (Occupations Self-Coding Automatic Recording), a new validated online tool that automatically codes jobs into the UK Standard Occupational Classification v.2000. Prevalence ratios for COPD by employment duration in each job compared to lifetime office workers were estimated using robust Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, centre and smoking. Only associations confirmed among never-smokers and never-asthmatics were considered reliable.From the 116 375 participants with complete job-histories, 94 551 had acceptable/repeatable spirometry data and smoking information and were included in the analysis. Six occupations showed an increased COPD risk among never-smokers and never-asthmatics; most of these also with positive exposure-response trends. Interesting new findings included sculptors, gardeners and warehouse workers.COPD patients, especially never-smokers, should be asked about their job-history for better disease management. Focussed preventive strategies in COPD high-risk jobs are warranted.

Cancers in France in 2015 attributable to occupational exposures.

BACKGROUND: Recent and comprehensive estimates for the number of new cancer cases in France attributable to occupational exposures are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the number of new cancer cases attributable to occupational exposures, using a newly developed methodology and the most recent data, for a comprehensive set of occupational carcinogens in France in 2015. METHODS: Surveys among employees, the national labor force data, a cohort of agricultural workers, national monitoring of workers exposed to ionizing radiation and job-exposure matrix in France were used. The number and proportion of new cancer cases attributable to established occupational carcinogens (Group 1) was estimated using estimation of lifetime exposure and risk estimates from cohort studies. Cancer data were obtained from the French Cancer Registries Network. RESULTS: In France in 2015, an estimated 7905 new cancer cases, 7336 among men and 569 among women, were attributable to occupational exposures, representing 2.3% of all new cancer cases (3.9% and 0.4% among men and women respectively). Among men and women, lung cancer was impacted the most, followed by mesothelioma and bladder cancer in men, and by mesothelioma and ovary in women. These cancers contributed to 89% of the total cancers attributable to occupational carcinogens in men, and to 80% in women. The main contributing occupational agent was asbestos among men (45%) and women (60%). CONCLUSIONS: Currently, occupational exposures contribute to a substantial burden of cancer in France. Enhanced monitoring and implementation of protective labor policies could potentially prevent a large proportion of these cancers.

Cancers related to lifestyle and environmental factors in France in 2015.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a major cause of premature illness and death in France. To quantify how cancer prevention could reduce the burden, we present estimates of the contribution of lifestyle and environmental risk factors to cancer incidence in France in 2015, comparing these with other high-income countries. METHOD: Prevalences of, and relative risks for tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption, inadequate diet, overweight and obesity, physical inactivity, exogenous hormones, suboptimal breastfeeding, infectious agents, ionising radiation, air pollution, ultraviolet exposure, occupational exposures, arsenic in drinking water and indoor benzene were obtained to estimate the population attributable fraction (PAF) and the number of attributable cancers by the cancer site and sex. RESULTS: In 2015, 41% (or 142,000 of 346,000) of all new cancers diagnosed in France could be attributed to the aforementioned risk factors. The numbers and PAF were slightly higher in men than in women (84,000 versus 58,000 cases and 44% versus 37%, respectively). Smoking (PAF: 20%), alcohol consumption (PAF: 8%), dietary factors (PAF: 5%) and excess weight (PAF: 5%) were the most important factors. Infections and occupational exposures each contributed to an additional 4% of the cancer cases in 2015. CONCLUSION: Today, two-fifths of cancers in France are attributable to preventable risk factors. The variations in the key amenable factors responsible in France relative to other economically similar countries highlight the need for tailored approaches to cancer education and prevention. Reducing smoking and alcohol consumption and the adoption of healthier diet and body weight remain important targets to reduce the increasing number of new cancer patients in France in the decades to follow.

Occupational exposures and cancer: a review of agents and relative risk estimates.

OBJECTIVES: The contribution of occupational exposures to the cancer burden can be estimated using population-attributable fractions, which is of great importance for policy making. This paper reviews occupational carcinogens, and presents the most relevant risk relations to cancer in high-income countries using France as an example, to provide a framework for national estimation of cancer burden attributable to occupational exposure. METHODS: Occupational exposures that should be included in cancer burden studies were evaluated using multiple criteria: classified as carcinogenic or probably carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs volumes 1-114, being a primary occupational exposure, historical and current presence of the exposure in France and the availability of exposure and risk relation data. Relative risk estimates were obtained from published systematic reviews and from the IARC Monographs. RESULTS: Of the 118 group 1 and 75 group 2A carcinogens, 37 exposures and 73 exposure-cancer site pairs were relevant. Lung cancer was associated with the most occupational carcinogenic exposures (namely, 18), followed by bladder cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ionising radiation was associated with the highest number of cancer sites (namely, 20), followed by asbestos and working in the rubber manufacturing industry. Asbestos, bis(chloromethyl)ether, nickel and wood dust had the strongest effect on cancer, with relative risks above 5. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of occupational exposures continues to impact the burden of cancer in high-income countries such as France. Information on types of exposures, affected jobs, industries and cancer sites affected is key for prioritising policy and prevention initiatives.

Does the Size of a Company Make a Difference in the Prevalence of Exposure to Asthmagens and in the Use of Respiratory Protective Equipment?

Introduction: About half of all workers in high-income countries work in small companies. However, regulatory bodies and researchers predominantly work with large companies because they are more convenient to study and easier to reach. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of exposure to asthmagens and the use of respiratory protective equipment (RPE) by company size. Methods: This analysis used data from the Australian Work Exposures Study-Asthma, a telephone survey which investigated exposure to 27 asthmagen groups. Results: Among 4844 respondents, 18.8, 19.9, 31.9, and 29.4% of workers reported working in micro (<5 employees), small (5-19 employees), medium (20-200 employees), and large (>200 employees) companies, respectively. Compared to workers in large companies, workers in micro, small, or medium companies had higher prevalence of exposure to most asthmagens and lesser use of RPE. Conclusion: Our results suggest that policy actions and regulatory measures should target micro/small companies in order to have the greatest effect.

The Global Burden of Occupational Disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Burden of occupational disease estimation contributes to understanding of both magnitude and relative importance of different occupational hazards and provides essential information for targeting risk reduction. This review summarises recent key findings and discusses their impact on occupational regulation and practice. RECENT FINDINGS: New methods have been developed to estimate burden of occupational disease that take account of the latency of many chronic diseases and allow for exposure trends and workforce turnover. Results from these studies have shown in several countries and globally that, in spite of improvements in workplace technology, practices and exposures over the last decades, occupational hazards remain an important cause of ill health and mortality worldwide. Major data gaps have been identified particularly regarding exposure information. Reliable data on employment and disease are also lacking especially in developing countries. Burden of occupational disease estimates form an important part of decision-making processes.

Estimating the burden of occupational cancer: assessing bias and uncertainty.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to estimate credibility intervals for the British occupational cancer burden to account for bias uncertainty, using a method adapted from Greenland's Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis. METHODS: The attributable fraction (AF) methodology used for our cancer burden estimates requires risk estimates and population proportions exposed for each agent/cancer pair. Sources of bias operating on AF estimator components include non-portability of risk estimates, inadequate models, inaccurate data including unknown cancer latency and employment turnover and compromises in using the available estimators. Each source of bias operates on a component of the AF estimator. Independent prior distributions were estimated for each bias, or graphical sensitivity analysis was used to identify plausible distribution ranges for the component variables, with AF recalculated following Monte Carlo repeated sampling from these distributions. The methods are illustrated using the example of lung cancer due to occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica in men. RESULTS: Results are presented graphically for a hierarchy of biases contributing to an overall credibility interval for lung cancer and respirable crystalline silica exposure. An overall credibility interval of 2.0% to 16.2% was estimated for an AF of 3.9% in men. Choice of relative risk and employment turnover were shown to contribute most to overall estimate uncertainty. Bias from using an incorrect estimator makes a much lower contribution. CONCLUSIONS: The method illustrates the use of credibility intervals to indicate relative contributions of important sources of uncertainty and identifies important data gaps; results depend greatly on the priors chosen.

The future excess fraction of occupational cancer among those exposed to carcinogens at work in Australia in 2012.

BACKGROUND: Studies in other countries have generally found approximately 4% of current cancers to be attributable to past occupational exposures. This study aimed to estimate the future burden of cancer resulting from current occupational exposures in Australia. METHODS: The future excess fraction method was used to estimate the future burden of occupational cancer (2012-2094) among the proportion of the Australian working population who were exposed to occupational carcinogens in 2012. Calculations were conducted for 19 cancer types and 53 cancer-exposure pairings, assuming historical trends and current patterns continued to 2094. RESULTS: The cohort of 14.6 million Australians of working age in 2012 will develop an estimated 4.8 million cancers during their lifetime, of which 68,500 (1.4%) are attributable to occupational exposure in those exposed in 2012. The majority of these will be lung cancers (n=26,000), leukaemias (n=8000), and malignant mesotheliomas (n=7500). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of future cancers will result from occupational exposures. This estimate is lower than previous estimates in the literature; however, our estimate is not directly comparable to past estimates of the occupational cancer burden because they describe different quantities - future cancers in currently exposed versus current cancers due to past exposures. The results of this study allow us to determine which current occupational exposures are most important, and where to target exposure prevention.

The burden of occupationally-related cutaneous malignant melanoma in Britain due to solar radiation.

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence highlights the association of occupational exposure and cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM). We estimated the burden of CMM and total skin cancer burden in Britain due to occupational solar radiation exposure. METHODS: Attributable fractions (AF) and numbers were estimated for CMM mortality and incidence using risk estimates from the published literature and national data sources for proportions exposed. We extended existing methods to account for the exposed population age structure. RESULTS: The estimated total AF for CMM is 2.0% (95% CI: 1.4-2.7%), giving 48 (95% CI: 33-64) deaths in (2012) and 241 (95% CI: 168-325) registrations (in 2011) attributable to occupational exposure to solar radiation. Higher exposure and larger numbers exposed led to much higher numbers for men than women. Industries of concern are construction, agriculture, public administration and defence, and land transport. CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasise the urgent need to develop appropriate strategies to reduce this burden.

Occupational self-coding and automatic recording (OSCAR): a novel web-based tool to collect and code lifetime job histories in large population-based studies.

Objectives The standard approach to the assessment of occupational exposures is through the manual collection and coding of job histories. This method is time-consuming and costly and makes it potentially unfeasible to perform high quality analyses on occupational exposures in large population-based studies. Our aim was to develop a novel, efficient web-based tool to collect and code lifetime job histories in the UK Biobank, a population-based cohort of over 500 000 participants. Methods We developed OSCAR (occupations self-coding automatic recording) based on the hierarchical structure of the UK Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) 2000, which allows individuals to collect and automatically code their lifetime job histories via a simple decision-tree model. Participants were asked to find each of their jobs by selecting appropriate job categories until they identified their job title, which was linked to a hidden 4-digit SOC code. For each occupation a job title in free text was also collected to estimate Cohen's kappa (κ) inter-rater agreement between SOC codes assigned by OSCAR and an expert manual coder. Results OSCAR was administered to 324 653 UK Biobank participants with an existing email address between June and September 2015. Complete 4-digit SOC-coded lifetime job histories were collected for 108 784 participants (response rate: 34%). Agreement between the 4-digit SOC codes assigned by OSCAR and the manual coder for a random sample of 400 job titles was moderately good [κ=0.45, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.42-0.49], and improved when broader job categories were considered (κ=0.64, 95% CI 0.61-0.69 at a 1-digit SOC-code level). Conclusions OSCAR is a novel, efficient, and reasonably reliable web-based tool for collecting and automatically coding lifetime job histories in large population-based studies. Further application in other research projects for external validation purposes is warranted.

Population Attributable and Preventable Fractions: Cancer Risk Factor Surveillance, and Cancer Policy Projection.

The proportions of new cancer cases and deaths that are caused by exposure to risk factors and that could be prevented are key statistics for public health policy and planning. This paper summarizes the methodologies for estimating, challenges in the analysis of, and utility of, population attributable and preventable fractions for cancers caused by major risk factors such as tobacco smoking, dietary factors, high body fat, physical inactivity, alcohol consumption, infectious agents, occupational exposure, air pollution, sun exposure, and insufficient breastfeeding. For population attributable and preventable fractions, evidence of a causal relationship between a risk factor and cancer, outcome (such as incidence and mortality), exposure distribution, relative risk, theoretical-minimum-risk, and counterfactual scenarios need to be clearly defined and congruent. Despite limitations of the methodology and the data used for estimations, the population attributable and preventable fractions are a useful tool for public health policy and planning.