MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rotating Shift Work and Risk of Prostate Cancer

2006· letter· en· W2061350778 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Conlon, Nancy Lightfoot, Nancy Kreiger

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology · 2006
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsSudbury Regional HospitalCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerMedicineBreast cancerFamily historyCancerPopulationDemographyGynecologyGerontologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor: Most of the published epidemiologic literature on the effect of light at night and cancer examines the risk of breast cancer (eg, Davis et al,1 Hansen2). A recent systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that increased risk of breast cancer may be associated with engagement in night work (a proxy for exposure to light at night) and a related decrease in melatonin production.3 Despite the biologic plausibility of decreased melatonin affecting cancers other than of the breast,4 there is only one published report of increased risk of colorectal cancer in women who work rotating night shifts5 and 1 recent report on prostate cancer risk in males.6 We assessed the association between rotating shift work and the risk of prostate cancer using previously collected case–control data that assessed medical history and sexual and physical factors. Details of the population-based study have been reported elsewhere.7 Participants in this questionnaire-based study were 760 cancer registry-identified cases, age 45 to 84 years, who were diagnosed between 1995 and 1998 and 1,632 controls who were frequency-matched on age—all of whom resided in northeastern Ontario. The 25-page mailed questionnaire included questions about age and family history of prostate cancer, medical and sexual history, physical characteristics, diet, physical activity, smoking, residential history, and lifetime work history. Specifically, for each job held for 1 year or more (including seasonal work and part-time work), respondents were asked number of years worked, work type (full-time, part-time, seasonal), type of industry/employer, name of employer, and usual work time (daytime shift, evening/nightshift, rotating shift, other). We created an exposure variable for ever having worked rotating full-time work and other quantitative metrics related to full-time rotating shift work as our surrogate for increased light at night. These included duration (years) of shift work, age at first shift work (based on the quartile distribution in controls), age at first shift work (based on age decades), and years since first shift work (based on the quartile distribution in controls). We adjusted all analyses for age and family history of prostate cancer. Ever having worked full-time rotating shift work was associated with increased risk of prostate cancer, with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0–1.4) (Table 1). Compared with men who never worked full-time rotating shift work, men who worked full-time rotating shift work for less than 7 years were at highest risk of prostate cancer, with an OR of 1.4 (1.1–1.9). Men who began working full-time rotating shift work in their mid 20s appeared at highest risk, with an OR of 1.4 (1.1–1.8), and starting full-time rotating shift work 37 to 44 years before diagnosis was associated with a 34% increased risk (CI = 1.0–1.8).TABLE 1: Association of Working Full-Time Rotating Shift Work With Prostate CancerThese results suggest that working full-time rotating shifts may be associated with increased risk of prostate cancer. Given previous epidemiologic research showing shift work as a risk factor for breast and colorectal cancers in women, these results provide modest epidemiologic support for the association in males. Our exposure variable was not originally designed to assess this hypothesis, and therefore we could not assess other aspects of exposure to light at night that might affect cancer risk. Nonetheless, although our exposure variable is a proxy, our results are interesting given that nondifferential misclassification of exposure would be expected to attenuate effects. This exploratory analysis indicates that working full-time rotating shift work may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer, which is suggestive of an association between light at night and cancer risk. This finding should be examined in other studies. Michael Conlon Research Program Regional Cancer Program Sudbury Regional Hospital Sudbury, Ontario, Canada Nancy Lightfoot Epidemiology Research Unit Regional Cancer Program, Sudbury Regional Hospital Division of Human Sciences, Northern Ontario School of Medicine Sudbury, Ontario, Canada Nancy Kreiger Departments of Public Health Sciences and Nutritional Sciences University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada Research Unit, Division of Preventive Oncology Cancer Care Ontario Toronto, Ontario, Canada [email protected]

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations226
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiologySame topicSleep and Work-Related FatigueFrench-language works237,207