A weight-of-evidence review of colorectal cancer in pesticide applicators: the agricultural health study and other epidemiologic studies
[entry-title]

The objective was to systematically evaluate epidemiologic studies on pesticides and colon cancer and rectal cancer in agricultural pesticide applicator populations using a transparent “weight-of-evidence” (WOE) methodological approach. Twenty-nine publications from the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) and 13 additional epidemiologic studies were identified that reported data for pesticide applicators and/or specific pesticide compounds and colorectal, colon, or rectal cancer. The AHS evaluated pesticide applicators as well as dose-response associations for specific pesticide compounds, whereas the large majority of non-AHS evaluated applicators but did not analyze specific compounds or dose-response trends. This WOE assessment of 153 different pesticide-outcome pairs emphasized several key evidentiary features: existence of statistically significant relative risks, magnitude of observed associations, results from the most reliable exposure assessments, and evidence of convincing dose-response relationships (i.e., those monotonically increasing, with statistically significant trend tests). Occupation as a pesticide applicator or pesticide application as a farming-related function was not associated with increasing the risk of colon or rectal cancer. Deficits of colon or rectal cancer were observed across most studies of pesticide applicators. After applying the WOE methodology to the epidemiologic studies of specific pesticide compounds and colon or rectal cancer, a number of pesticide-outcome pairs were identified and evaluated […]

Read Article →
Long-Chain Omega-3 Fatty Acids Eicosapentaenoic Acid and Docosahexaenoic Acid and Blood Pressure: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
[entry-title]

Although a large body of literature has been devoted to examining the relationship between eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids (EPA+DHA) and blood pressure, past systematic reviews have been hampered by narrow inclusion criteria and a limited scope of analytical subgroups. In addition, no meta-analysis to date has captured the substantial volume of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the past 2 years. The objective of this meta-analysis was to examine the effect of EPA+DHA, without upper dose limits and including food sources, on blood pressure in RCTs. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to generate weighted group mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between the EPA+DHA group and the placebo group. Analyses were conducted for subgroups defined by key subject or study characteristics. Seventy RCTs were included. Compared with placebo, EPA+DHA provision reduced systolic blood pressure (-1.52mm Hg; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -2.25 to -0.79) and diastolic blood pressure (- 0.99mmHg; 95% CI = – 1.54 to – 0.44) in the meta-analyses of all studies combined. The strongest effects of EPA+DHA were observed among untreated hypertensive subjects (systolic blood pressure = – 4.51mm Hg, 95% CI = – 6.12 to – 2.83; diastolic blood pressure = – 3.05mm Hg, 95% CI […]

Read Article →