Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Epidemiol ; 193(8): 1182-1196, 2024 Aug 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38400646

RESUMEN

We synthesized the epidemiologic evidence on the associations between per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure and breast cancer risk. Our systematic review and meta-analysis included 18 and 11 articles, respectively, covering studies up to February 2023. The summary relative risks (RRs) estimated by random-effects meta-analyses did not support an association between PFAS and overall breast cancer risk (eg, a natural log (ln)-unit increase in serum/plasma concentrations [ng/mL] for perfluorooctanoate [PFOA] RR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77-1.18; perfluorooctane sulfonate [PFOS] RR = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.87-1.11). However, when limiting to studies that assessed exposures prior to a breast cancer diagnosis, we observed a positive association with PFOA (a ln-unit increase, RR = 1.16; 95% CI, 0.96-1.40). We also observed some possible heterogeneous associations by tumor estrogen and progesterone receptor status among postmenopausal breast cancer cases. No meaningful changes were observed after excluding the studies with high risk of bias (Tier 3). Based on the evaluation tool developed by the National Toxicology Program, given the heterogeneity across studies and the variability in timing of exposure measurements, the epidemiologic evidence needed to determine the association between PFAS exposure and breast cancer remains inadequate. Our findings support the need for future studies with improved study designs to determine this association.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Caprilatos , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales , Fluorocarburos , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/inducido químicamente , Neoplasias de la Mama/sangre , Fluorocarburos/sangre , Fluorocarburos/efectos adversos , Femenino , Caprilatos/sangre , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/efectos adversos , Ácidos Alcanesulfónicos/sangre , Estudios Epidemiológicos
2.
Environ Int ; 187: 108644, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38636272

RESUMEN

Glyphosate is the most widely applied herbicide worldwide. Glyphosate biomonitoring data are limited for agricultural settings. We measured urinary glyphosate concentrations and assessed exposure determinants in the Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect in Agriculture (BEEA) study. We selected four groups of BEEA participants based on self-reported pesticide exposure: recently exposed farmers with occupational glyphosate use in the last 7 days (n = 98), farmers with high lifetime glyphosate use (>80th percentile) but no use in the last 7 days (n = 70), farming controls with minimal lifetime use (n = 100), and nonfarming controls with no occupational pesticide exposures and no recent home/garden glyphosate use (n = 100). Glyphosate was quantified in first morning void urine using ion chromatography isotope-dilution tandem mass spectrometry. We estimated associations between urinary glyphosate concentrations and potential determinants using multivariable linear regression. Glyphosate was detected (≥0.2 µg/L) in urine of most farmers with recent (91 %) and high lifetime (93 %) use, as well as farming (88 %) and nonfarming (81 %) controls; geometric mean concentrations were 0.89, 0.59, 0.46, and 0.39 µg/L (0.79, 0.51, 0.42, and 0.37 µg/g creatinine), respectively. Compared with both control groups, urinary glyphosate concentrations were significantly elevated among recently exposed farmers (P < 0.0001), particularly those who used glyphosate in the previous day [vs. nonfarming controls; geometric mean ratio (GMR) = 5.46; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 3.75, 7.93]. Concentrations among high lifetime exposed farmers were also elevated (P < 0.01 vs. nonfarming controls). Among recently exposed farmers, glyphosate concentrations were higher among those not wearing gloves when applying glyphosate (GMR = 1.91; 95 % CI: 1.17, 3.11), not wearing long-sleeved shirts when mixing/loading glyphosate (GMR = 2.00; 95 % CI: 1.04, 3.86), applying glyphosate exclusively using broadcast/boom sprayers (vs. hand sprayer only; GMR = 1.70; 95 % CI: 1.00, 2.92), and applying glyphosate to crops (vs. non-crop; GMR = 1.72; 95 % CI: 1.04, 2.84). Both farmers and nonfarmers are exposed to glyphosate, with recency of occupational glyphosate use being the strongest determinant of urinary glyphosate concentrations. Continued biomonitoring of glyphosate in various settings is warranted.


Asunto(s)
Agricultura , Monitoreo Biológico , Biomarcadores , Agricultores , Glicina , Glifosato , Herbicidas , Exposición Profesional , Humanos , Glicina/análogos & derivados , Glicina/orina , Masculino , Exposición Profesional/análisis , Herbicidas/orina , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Biomarcadores/orina , Anciano , Monitoreo del Ambiente/métodos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA