| Literature DB >> 28924456 |
Dianne E Godar1, Madhan Subramanian2, Stephen J Merrill3.
Abstract
Because the incidence of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) was reported to increase with increasing terrestrial UVR (290-400 nm) doses in the US back in 1975 and a recent publication showed no association exists with UVR exposure at all, we set out to fully elucidate the role of UVR in CMM. To achieve this goal, we analyzed the CMM incidences over latitude and estimated the average personal UVR dose in the US and numerous countries (> 50) on 5 continents around the world. Using data from the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2005, we performed worldwide analysis of CMM over UVR dose by sex, age group (0-14, 15-29, 30-49, 50-69, 70-85+) and Fitzpatrick skin types I-VI. Surprisingly, increasing UVR doses, which represent erythemally-weighted doses comprised primarily of UVB (290-315 nm) radiation, did not significantly correlate with increasing CMM incidence for people with any skin type anywhere in the world. Paradoxically, we found significant correlations between increasing CMM and decreasing UVB dose in Europeans with skin types I-IV. Both Europeans and Americans in some age groups have significant increasing CMM incidences with decreasing UVB dose, which shows UVB is not the main driver in CMM and suggests a possible role for lower cutaneous vitamin D3 levels and UVA (315-400 nm) radiation. CMM may be initiated or promoted by UVA radiation because people are exposed to it indoors through windows and outdoors through some sunscreen formulations. Thus, our findings may explain why some broad-spectrum sunscreen formulations do not protect against getting CMM.Entities:
Keywords: DNA Damage; Ultraviolet-A; Ultraviolet-B; aging; pheomelanin; pigment; skin cancer; vitamin D3
Year: 2016 PMID: 28924456 PMCID: PMC5400110 DOI: 10.1080/19381980.2016.1267077
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dermatoendocrinol ISSN: 1938-1972
Figure 3.Age-standardized CMM cases per 100,000 people by personal UVB dose in J/m2 for males and females with Fitzpatrick skin type IV-VI. Semi-log plots were chosen for visual presentation only.
P values from the linear correlation of CMM with UVB dose for males and females in the 5 age groups in countries with different Fitzpatrick skin types I-VI. We consider p values < 0.05 to be significant. Values in bold show significant correlations between increasing UVB dose and increasing CMM, but those that are bold italicized have significant correlations between decreasing UVB dose and increasing CMM incidence. ND = no data above zero to analyze.
| Australian | US White | European | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female |
| 0–14 | 0.204 | 0.132 | 0.456 | 0.312 | 0.426 | 0.685 |
| 15–29 | 0.177 | 0.385 | 0.067 | |||
| 30–49 | 0.101 | 0.381 | 0.158 | 0.313 | ||
| 50–69 | 0.109 | 0.739 | 0.054 | 0.152 | ||
| 70–85 | 0.550 | 0.309 | 0.472 | 0.513 | 0.064 | |
| 0–14 | ND | ND | ND | 0.436 | 0.536 | 0.281 |
| 15–29 | 0.248 | 0.369 | 0.686 | 0.815 | 0.098 | |
| 30–49 | 0.952 | 0.763 | 0.531 | 0.879 | 0.299 | 0.081 |
| 50–69 | 0.429 | 0.968 | 0.130 | 0.625 | 0.963 | 0.365 |
| 70–85 | 0.951 | 0.057 | 0.601 | 0.593 | 0.894 | 0.318 |
| 0–14 | 0.604 | 0.454 | ND | ND | 0.606 | 0.526 |
| 15–29 | 0.113 | 0.087 | 0.664 | 0.473 | 0.406 | 0.140 |
| 30–49 | 0.779 | 0.675 | 0.188 | |||
| 50–69 | 0.224 | 0.725 | 0.056 | 0.172 | ||
| 70–85 | 0.248 | 0.600 | 0.778 | 0.074 | ||
Figure 1.Age-standardized CMM cases per 100,000 people by personal UVB dose in J/m2 for males and females with Fitzpatrick skin type I-III. Semi-log plots were chosen for visual presentation only.
Figure 2.Age-standardized CMM cases per 100,000 people by personal UVB dose in J/m2 for males and females with Fitzpatrick skin type III-IV. Semi-log plots were chosen for visual presentation only.
Figure 4.The consequences of DNA photoproduct damage from exposure to outdoor UVA and UVB radiation versus indoor UVA radiation. Outdoor sunshine has both UVA and UVB radiation vs. indoor sunshine that has only UVA radiation because, unlike UVB, it can pass through window glass. The outdoor UVB radiation causes efficient pyrimidine dimer formation and UVA makes benzothiazine or benzothiazinylalanine and other radicals (λmax >340 nm) that cannot react with the pyrimidine dimers formed outdoors because the covalent bonds block the available reaction sites (competitive reaction); whereas, indoor UVA forms few dimers so that many pyrimidine sites are available to react with the benzothiazine radicals it forms. Besides UVA creating ROS that oxidizes deoxyguanosine to 8-oxodG (G = O in diagram), UVA can create ONOO- radicals that can also make CPD in the dark for several hours post exposure [80].