Download the Free Unbound MEDLINE PubMed App to your smartphone or tablet.
Available for iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, and Android.
Geiger counter [keywords]
- [Lung cancer screening in Japan -present and future]. [Journal Article]
- Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2014 Aug; 41(8):955-9.
- Health initiatives for the prevention of skin cancer. [Journal Article]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:485-99.
Skin cancer is the most frequent type of cancer in white population worldwide. However, because the most prominent risk factor-solar UV-radiation and/or artificial UV from sunbeds-is known, skin cancer is highly preventable be primary prevention. This prevention needs, that the public is informed by simple and balanced messages about the possible harms and benefits of UV-exposure and how a person should behave under certain conditions of UV-exposure. For this purpose information and recommendations for the public must be age- and target-group specific to cover all periods of life and to reach all sub-groups of a population, continuously. There is a need that political institutions together with Health Institutions and Societies (e.g., European Commission, WHO, EUROSKIN, ICNIRP, etc.), which are responsible for primary prevention of skin cancer, find a common language to inform the public, in order not to confuse it. This is especially important in connection with the ongoing Vitamin D debate, where possible positive effects of UV have to be balanced with the well known skin cancer risk of UV. A continuously ongoing evaluation of interventions and programs in primary prevention is a pre-requisite to assess the effectiveness of strategies. There is surely no "no message fits all" approach, but balanced information in health initiatives for prevention of skin cancer, which use evidence-base strategies, will further be needed in the future to reduce the incidence, morbidity and mortality skin cancer.
- Sunscreens in the United States: current status and future outlook. [Journal Article, Review]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:464-84.
Incidence rates of nonmelanoma skin cancer and melanoma has been on the rise in the United States for the past 20 years. UV radiation (UVR) exposure remains the most preventable environmental risk factor for these cancers. Aside from sun avoidance, sunscreens remain our best protection. UVR directly damages DNA and cause indirect cellular damage through the creation of reactive oxygen species, the sum of which leads to cutaneous immunosuppression and a tumorigenic milieu. The current generation of sunscreens protect from UVR through two main mechanisms: absorption and deflection. In the US, new Food and Drug Association rules require sunscreen manufacturers to evaluate their products not only on sun protection factor but also on broad spectrum UVA protection by the end of 2013. New labeling requirements will also be instituted. The American Academy of Dermatology and the American Academy of Pediatrics have provided specific recommendations for proper sun protection and sunscreen usage. Plant polyphenols such as those isolated from green tea, pomegranate, and grape seed remain an interesting avenue of research as additives to sunscreens or stand-alone products that appear to modulate the immunosuppressive effects of UVR on the skin. Additionally, although UVR induces endogenous cutaneous production of vitamin D, its damaging effects overshadow this positive benefit, especially in light of the ease of achieving recommended amounts of vitamin D through diet and supplementation.
- Sunscreens. [Journal Article]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:429-63.
Sunscreens have become since more than 40 years the most popular means of protection against UV radiation (UVR) in Western countries. Organic and inorganic filters with different absorption spectrum exist. They filter or scatter UVR. Protection from UVB is quantified as a minimal erythema dose-based sun protection factor. UVA protection testing is less standardized: Persistent pigment darkening and critical wavelength are currently used methods. Marketing and labeling of sunscreens underlay national regulation which explains major differences between the European and the US sunscreen market. Sunscreens are most performing in sunburn prevention. Broad spectrum UVB and UVA protection and regular application in sufficient amounts are essential for prevention of skin cancers, UV-induced immunosuppression, and skin aging. A significant benefit from regular sunscreen use has not yet been demonstrated for primary prevention of basal cell carcinoma and melanoma. Concerning the prevention of actinic keratoses, squamous cell carcinomas, and skin aging, the effect of sunscreens is significant, but it remains incomplete. Some organic UV filters (PABA derivatives, cinnamates, benzophenones, and octocrylene) have been described to cause photoallergy. Percutaneous absorption and endocrine disrupting activity of small-sized organic and nano-sized inorganic UV filters have been reported. On lesional skin and in pediatric settings, these products should be used with caution. Cutaneous vitamin D synthesis depending on skin-carcinogenic UVB radiation, the potential risk of vitamin D deficiency by sunscreen use has become a major subject of public health debate. Sunscreens indeed impair vitamin D synthesis if they are used in the recommended amount of 2 mg/cm2, but not in lesser thickness below 1.5 mg/cm2 that corresponds better to what users apply in real life conditions. Large molecular last generation UVB-UVA broad spectrum sunscreens have a better benefit-risk ratio than former organic filters: They offer better protection in the UVA band, they are non toxic and non allergenic. A better outcome of sunscreen efficacy especially in primary skin cancer prevention may be achieved with these molecules.
- Ultraviolet-radiation and health: optimal time for sun exposure. [Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:423-8.
Positive as well as negative health effects of exposure of human skin to UV radiation depend on spectra and fluence rates, both of which being dependent on latitude, time of the day and several other factors. The major positive effects are related to vitamin D photosynthesis and the major negative effect is skin cancer development. The action spectra for these effects are different. This lead us to conclude that for optimal vitamin D synthesis at minimal risk of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM), the best time for sun exposure is between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. Thus, the common health recommendation (that sun exposure should be avoided between the hours of 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. and postponed to the afternoon) may be wrong.
- Ultraviolet exposure scenarios: risks of erythema from recommendations on cutaneous vitamin D synthesis. [Journal Article]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:406-22.
Exposure to sunlight is a major source of vitamin D for most people yet public health advice focuses overwhelmingly on avoiding exposure of unprotected skin because of the risks oferythema and skin cancer. We have calculated the exposure required to gain a number of proposed oral-equivalent doses of vitamin D, as functions of latitude, season, skin type and skin area exposed, together with the associated risk of erythema, expressed in minimum erythema doses. The model results show that the current recommended daily intake of 400 IU is readily achievable through casual sun exposure in the midday lunch hour, with no risk of erythema, for all latitudes some of the year and for all the year at some (low) latitudes. At the higher proposed vitamin D dose of 1000 IU lunchtime sun exposure is still a viable route to the vitamin, but requires the commitment to expose greater areas of skin, or is effective for a shorter period of the year. The highest vitamin D requirement considered was 4000 IU per day. For much of the globe and much of the year, this is not achievable in a lunchtime hour and where it is possible large areas of skin must be exposed to prevent erythema. When the only variable considered was skin type, latitudinal and seasonal limits on adequate vitamin D production were more restrictive for skin type 5 than skin type 2.
- Sunlight, vitamin D and malignant melanoma: an update. [Journal Article]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:390-405.
Solar radiation represents an essential requirement for life, not only by spending the thermal energy for photosynthesis in plants, which provides our atmosphere with oxygen, but also by facilitating the cutaneous synthesis of vitamin D in vertebrates and many other organisms. It is well known that humans and most vertebrates have to obtain an adequate source of vitamin D, in order to develop and maintain a healthy mineralized skeleton and in order to be protected against cancer and a broad variety of other diseases. On the other hand, solar UV radiation can be assumed to be the most relevant environmental carcinogen causing melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer with increasing incidences. During the last decades, epidemiological studies and experimental animal models, including genetically engineered mice, the Xiphophorus hybrid fish, the south american oppossum and human skin xenografts, have further elucidated the multi-step process of UV-induced melanomagenesis. It has to be emphasized that, in contrast to intermittent, short-term high-dose solar UV-exposure, more chronic less intense exposure (which is recommended by many experts in the field to obtain a sufficient vitamin D status) has not been found to be a risk factor for the development of melanoma and in fact has been found in several studies to be protective. Interestingly, several independent lines of investigation have demonstrated convincing evidence that vitamin D and/or analogs may be effective in the prevention and treatment of melanoma. This essay summarizes our present understanding about the pathogenic role of UV radiation and of vitamin D for malignant melanoma.
- Sun exposure and melanomas on sun-shielded and sun-exposed body areas. [Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:375-89.
Malignant melanoma is a tumor that arises from melanocytes and accounts for around 4% of all malignancies in Europe and Northern America and for about 11% in Australia and New Zealand. About 10% of primary melanomas arise from sites not exposed to sun. Acral lentiginous melanoma, mucosal melanoma (in the oral cavities, nasal sinuses, genital tract and rectum) and uveal melanoma are all on non-sun-exposed tissues. Epidemiologic aspects ofmelanomas on non-sun-exposed areas in comparison with melanomas in sun-exposed areas have been reviewed. We focus on the relationship between melanoma incidence, geographic latitude of residence, race/ethnicity and host factors as well as time trends.
- Ultraviolet radiation and cutaneous malignant melanoma. [Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review]
- Adv Exp Med Biol 2014.:359-74.
Essential features of the epidemiology and photobiology of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) in Norway were studied in comparison with data from countries at lower latitudes. Arguments for and against a relationship between ultraviolet radiation (UV) from sun and artificial light and CMM are discussed. Our data indicate that UV is a carcinogen for CMM and that intermittent exposures are notably melanomagenic. This hypothesis was supported both by latitude gradients, by time trends and by changing patterns of tumor density on different body localizations. However, even though UV radiation generates CMM, it may also have a protective action and/or an action that improves prognosis. There appears to be no, or even an inverse latitude gradient for CMM arising on non-UV exposed body localizations (uveal melanoma, CMMs arising in the vulva, perianal/anorectal regions, etc.). Furthermore, CMM prognosis was gradually improved over all years of increasing incidence (up to 1990), but during the past 20 years, incidence rates stabilized and prognosis was not improved significantly. Comparisons of skin cancer data from Norway, Australia and New Zealand indicate that squamous cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma are mainly related to annual solar UVB fluences, while UVA fluences play a larger role of CMM.