Ahmed Bedaiwi1, Ashley Wysong2, Eleanor G Rogan3, Dillon Clarey2, Christine M Arcari1. 1. 12284 Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA. 2. Department of Dermatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA. 3. Department of Environmental, Agricultural & Occupational Health, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Chronic exposure to arsenic has been reported as a risk factor for nonmelanoma skin cancer, notably squamous cell carcinoma. However, current knowledge is limited about the association between arsenic exposure and melanoma. Our objectives were to (1) measure the association between total urinary arsenic levels and melanoma compared with nonmelanoma skin cancer and no cancer and (2) analyze the association between water source and melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data from the 2003-2016 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We conducted univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. To evaluate the possible association of skin cancer with source of tap water, we calculated odds ratios for participants with melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer, compared with participants with no cancer. RESULTS: White race, higher education, higher socioeconomic status, and smoking history were associated with melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer in the full study population. After adjusting for age and race/ethnicity, the adjusted odds ratio of participants with >50 μg/L of total urinary arsenic for melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer was 1.87 (95% CI, 0.58-6.05) and 2.23 (95% CI, 1.12-4.45) times higher compared with no cancer, respectively. Participants with nonmelanoma skin cancer had 2.06 increased odds of reporting a nonmunicipal water source compared with participants without cancer. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a relationship between the incidence of melanoma and exposure to arsenic among US adults. Nonmunicipal water sources were associated with nonmelanoma skin cancer and should be further investigated.
OBJECTIVES: Chronic exposure to arsenic has been reported as a risk factor for nonmelanoma skin cancer, notably squamous cell carcinoma. However, current knowledge is limited about the association between arsenic exposure and melanoma. Our objectives were to (1) measure the association between total urinary arsenic levels and melanoma compared with nonmelanoma skin cancer and no cancer and (2) analyze the association between water source and melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data from the 2003-2016 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We conducted univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. To evaluate the possible association of skin cancer with source of tap water, we calculated odds ratios for participants with melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer, compared with participants with no cancer. RESULTS: White race, higher education, higher socioeconomic status, and smoking history were associated with melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer in the full study population. After adjusting for age and race/ethnicity, the adjusted odds ratio of participants with >50 μg/L of total urinary arsenic for melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer was 1.87 (95% CI, 0.58-6.05) and 2.23 (95% CI, 1.12-4.45) times higher compared with no cancer, respectively. Participants with nonmelanoma skin cancer had 2.06 increased odds of reporting a nonmunicipal water source compared with participants without cancer. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a relationship between the incidence of melanoma and exposure to arsenic among US adults. Nonmunicipal water sources were associated with nonmelanoma skin cancer and should be further investigated.
Entities:
Keywords:
NHANES; arsenic; melanoma; nonmelanoma skin cancer; skin cancer
Authors: Khaja Shameem Mohammed Abdul; Sudheera Sammanthi Jayasinghe; Ediriweera P S Chandana; Channa Jayasumana; P Mangala C S De Silva Journal: Environ Toxicol Pharmacol Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 4.860
Authors: Clifford L Johnson; Ryne Paulose-Ram; Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Deanna Kruszon-Moran; Sylvia M Dohrmann; Lester R Curtin Journal: Vital Health Stat 2 Date: 2013-09
Authors: Sam M Mbulaiteye; Robert J Biggar; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Paul M Bakaki; Christine Gamache; Anchilla M Owor; Edward Katongole-Mbidde; Christopher M Ndugwa; James J Goedert; Denise Whitby; Eric A Engels Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Gernot Pichler; Maria Grau-Perez; Maria Tellez-Plaza; Jason Umans; Lyle Best; Shelley Cole; Walter Goessler; Kevin Francesconi; Jonathan Newman; Josep Redon; Richard Devereux; Ana Navas-Acien Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Laura E Beane Freeman; Leslie K Dennis; Charles F Lynch; Peter S Thorne; Craig L Just Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Sara V Flanagan; Steven E Spayd; Nicholas A Procopio; Robert G Marvinney; Andrew E Smith; Steven N Chillrud; Stuart Braman; Yan Zheng Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2016-04-23 Impact factor: 7.963
Authors: Rikke Baastrup; Mette Sørensen; Thomas Balstrøm; Kirsten Frederiksen; Carsten Langtofte Larsen; Anne Tjønneland; Kim Overvad; Ole Raaschou-Nielsen Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Diane Gilbert-Diamond; Zhigang Li; Ann E Perry; Steven K Spencer; A Jay Gandolfi; Margaret R Karagas Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2013-07-19 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Marvin E Langston; Heidi E Brown; Charles F Lynch; Denise J Roe; Leslie K Dennis Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 4.614