TY - JOUR
T1 - The contribution of molecular epidemiology to the identification of human carcinogens
T2 - Current status and future perspectives
AU - Boffetta, P.
AU - Islami, F.
PY - 2013/4
Y1 - 2013/4
N2 - Background: The use of biological-based markers of exposure, intermediate effect, outcome, and susceptibility has become standard practice in cancer epidemiology, which has contributed to identification of several carcinogenic agents. Nevertheless, with the exception of biological agents, this contribution, in terms of providing sufficiently strong evidence as required by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) monographs, has been modest. Materials and methods: We discuss the overall contribution of molecular epidemiology to identification of carcinogens, with focus on IARC monographs. Results: For many carcinogens, valid biological markers of exposure and mechanisms of actions are not available. Molecular markers are usually assessed in single biological samples, which may not represent the actual exposure or biological events related to carcinogens. The contribution of molecular epidemiology to identification of carcinogens has mainly been limited to the carcinogens acting through a genotoxic mechanism, i.e. when carcinogens induce DNA damage. A number of factors, including certain hormones and overweight/obesity, may show carcinogenic effects through nongenotoxic pathways, for which mechanisms of carcinogenicity are not well identified and their biomarkers are sparse. Conclusion: Longitudinal assessment of biomarkers may provide more informative data in molecular epidemiology studies. For many carcinogens and mechanistic pathways, in particular nongenotoxic carcinogenicity, valid biological markers still need to be identified.
AB - Background: The use of biological-based markers of exposure, intermediate effect, outcome, and susceptibility has become standard practice in cancer epidemiology, which has contributed to identification of several carcinogenic agents. Nevertheless, with the exception of biological agents, this contribution, in terms of providing sufficiently strong evidence as required by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) monographs, has been modest. Materials and methods: We discuss the overall contribution of molecular epidemiology to identification of carcinogens, with focus on IARC monographs. Results: For many carcinogens, valid biological markers of exposure and mechanisms of actions are not available. Molecular markers are usually assessed in single biological samples, which may not represent the actual exposure or biological events related to carcinogens. The contribution of molecular epidemiology to identification of carcinogens has mainly been limited to the carcinogens acting through a genotoxic mechanism, i.e. when carcinogens induce DNA damage. A number of factors, including certain hormones and overweight/obesity, may show carcinogenic effects through nongenotoxic pathways, for which mechanisms of carcinogenicity are not well identified and their biomarkers are sparse. Conclusion: Longitudinal assessment of biomarkers may provide more informative data in molecular epidemiology studies. For many carcinogens and mechanistic pathways, in particular nongenotoxic carcinogenicity, valid biological markers still need to be identified.
KW - Cancer
KW - Carcinogenicity
KW - Epidemiology
KW - Genotoxicity
KW - Molecular epidemiology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875613748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/annonc/mds543
DO - 10.1093/annonc/mds543
M3 - Article
C2 - 23136234
AN - SCOPUS:84875613748
SN - 0923-7534
VL - 24
SP - 901
EP - 908
JO - Annals of Oncology
JF - Annals of Oncology
IS - 4
ER -