IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans

Neil Pearce; Aaron Blair; Paolo Vineis; Wolfgang Ahrens; Aage Andersen; Josep M. Anto; Bruce K. Armstrong; Andrea A. Baccarelli; Frederick A. Beland; Amy Berrington; Pier Alberto Bertazzi; Linda S. Birnbaum; Ross C. Brownson; John R. Bucher; Kenneth P. Cantor; Elisabeth Cardis; John W. Cherrie; David C. Christiani; Pierluigi Cocco; David Coggon; Pietro Comba; Paul A. Demers; John M. Dement; Jeroen Douwes; Ellen A. Eisen; Lawrence S. Engel; Richard A. Fenske; Lora E. Fleming; Tony Fletcher; Elizabeth Fontham; Francesco Forastiere; Rainer Frentzel-Beyme; Lin Fritschi; Michel Gerin; Marcel Goldberg; Philippe Grandjean; Tom K. Grimsrud; Per Gustavsson; Andy Haines; Patricia Hartge; Johnni Hansen; Michael Hauptmann; Dick Heederik; Kari Hemminki; Denis Hemon; Irva Hertz-Picciotto; Jane A. Hoppin; James Huff; Bengt Jarvholm; Daehee Kang; Margaret R. Karagas; Kristina Kjaerheim; Helge Kjuus; Manolis Kogevinas; David Kriebel; Petter Kristensen; Hans Kromhout; Francine Laden; Pierre Lebailly; Grace Lemasters; Jay H. Lubin; Charles F. Lynch; Elsebeth Lynge; Andreat Mannetje; Anthony J. McMichael; John R. McLaughlin; Loraine Marrett; Marco Martuzzi; James A. Merchant; Enzo Merler; Franco Merletti; Anthony Miller; Franklin E. Mirer; Richard Monson; Karl Cristian Nordby; Andrew F. Olshan; Marie Elise Parent; Frederica P. Perera; Melissa J. Perry; Angela Cecilia Pesatori; Roberta Pirastu; Miquel Porta; Eero Pukkala; Carol Rice; David B. Richardson; Leonard Ritter; Beate Ritz; Cecile M. Ronckers; Lesley Rushton; Jennifer A. Rusiecki; Ivan Rusyn; Jonathan M. Samet; Dale P. Sandler; Silvia de Sanjose; Eva Schernhammer; Adele Seniori Costantini; Noah Seixas; Carl Shy; Jack Siemiatycki; Debra T. Silverman; Lorenzo Simonato; Allan H. Smith; Martyn T. Smith; John J. Spinelli; Margaret R. Spitz; Lorann Stallones; Leslie T. Stayner; Kyle Steenland; Mark Stenzel; Bernard W. Stewart; Patricia A. Stewart; Elaine Symanski; Benedetto Terracini; Paige E. Tolbert; Harri Vainio; John Vena; Roel Vermeulen; Cesar G. Victora; Elizabeth M. Ward; Clarice R. Weinberg; Dennis Weisenburger; Catharina Wesseling; Elisabete Weiderpass; Shelia Hoar Zahm

doi:10.1289/ehp.1409149

IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans

Neil Pearce^*, Aaron Blair, Paolo Vineis, Wolfgang Ahrens, Aage Andersen, Josep M. Anto, Bruce K. Armstrong, Andrea A. Baccarelli, Frederick A. Beland, Amy Berrington, Pier Alberto Bertazzi, Linda S. Birnbaum, Ross C. Brownson, John R. Bucher, Kenneth P. Cantor, Elisabeth Cardis, John W. Cherrie, David C. Christiani, Pierluigi Cocco, David CoggonPietro Comba, Paul A. Demers, John M. Dement, Jeroen Douwes, Ellen A. Eisen, Lawrence S. Engel, Richard A. Fenske, Lora E. Fleming, Tony Fletcher, Elizabeth Fontham, Francesco Forastiere, Rainer Frentzel-Beyme, Lin Fritschi, Michel Gerin, Marcel Goldberg, Philippe Grandjean, Tom K. Grimsrud, Per Gustavsson, Andy Haines, Patricia Hartge, Johnni Hansen, Michael Hauptmann, Dick Heederik, Kari Hemminki, Denis Hemon, Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Jane A. Hoppin, James Huff, Bengt Jarvholm, Daehee Kang, Margaret R. Karagas, Kristina Kjaerheim, Helge Kjuus, Manolis Kogevinas, David Kriebel, Petter Kristensen, Hans Kromhout, Francine Laden, Pierre Lebailly, Grace Lemasters, Jay H. Lubin, Charles F. Lynch, Elsebeth Lynge, Andreat Mannetje, Anthony J. McMichael, John R. McLaughlin, Loraine Marrett, Marco Martuzzi, James A. Merchant, Enzo Merler, Franco Merletti, Anthony Miller, Franklin E. Mirer, Richard Monson, Karl Cristian Nordby, Andrew F. Olshan, Marie Elise Parent, Frederica P. Perera, Melissa J. Perry, Angela Cecilia Pesatori, Roberta Pirastu, Miquel Porta, Eero Pukkala, Carol Rice, David B. Richardson, Leonard Ritter, Beate Ritz, Cecile M. Ronckers, Lesley Rushton, Jennifer A. Rusiecki, Ivan Rusyn, Jonathan M. Samet, Dale P. Sandler, Silvia de Sanjose, Eva Schernhammer, Adele Seniori Costantini, Noah Seixas, Carl Shy, Jack Siemiatycki, Debra T. Silverman, Lorenzo Simonato, Allan H. Smith, Martyn T. Smith, John J. Spinelli, Margaret R. Spitz, Lorann Stallones, Leslie T. Stayner, Kyle Steenland, Mark Stenzel, Bernard W. Stewart, Patricia A. Stewart, Elaine Symanski, Benedetto Terracini, Paige E. Tolbert, Harri Vainio, John Vena, Roel Vermeulen, Cesar G. Victora, Elizabeth M. Ward, Clarice R. Weinberg, Dennis Weisenburger, Catharina Wesseling, Elisabete Weiderpass, Shelia Hoar Zahm

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

92 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans. oBjectives: The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed. discussion: We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed. conclusions: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public’s health.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	507-514
Number of pages	8
Journal	Environmental Health Perspectives
Volume	123
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409149
Publication status	Published - 2015

Access to Document

10.1289/ehp.1409149

Cite this

Pearce, N., Blair, A., Vineis, P., Ahrens, W., Andersen, A., Anto, J. M., Armstrong, B. K., Baccarelli, A. A., Beland, F. A., Berrington, A., Bertazzi, P. A., Birnbaum, L. S., Brownson, R. C., Bucher, J. R., Cantor, K. P., Cardis, E., Cherrie, J. W., Christiani, D. C., Cocco, P., ... Zahm, S. H. (2015). IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans. Environmental Health Perspectives, 123(6), 507-514. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409149

@article{a755d371cb8c4e299f3e487319ee6a50,

title = "IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans",

abstract = "Background: Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans. oBjectives: The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed. discussion: We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed. conclusions: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public{\textquoteright}s health.",

author = "Neil Pearce and Aaron Blair and Paolo Vineis and Wolfgang Ahrens and Aage Andersen and Anto, {Josep M.} and Armstrong, {Bruce K.} and Baccarelli, {Andrea A.} and Beland, {Frederick A.} and Amy Berrington and Bertazzi, {Pier Alberto} and Birnbaum, {Linda S.} and Brownson, {Ross C.} and Bucher, {John R.} and Cantor, {Kenneth P.} and Elisabeth Cardis and Cherrie, {John W.} and Christiani, {David C.} and Pierluigi Cocco and David Coggon and Pietro Comba and Demers, {Paul A.} and Dement, {John M.} and Jeroen Douwes and Eisen, {Ellen A.} and Engel, {Lawrence S.} and Fenske, {Richard A.} and Fleming, {Lora E.} and Tony Fletcher and Elizabeth Fontham and Francesco Forastiere and Rainer Frentzel-Beyme and Lin Fritschi and Michel Gerin and Marcel Goldberg and Philippe Grandjean and Grimsrud, {Tom K.} and Per Gustavsson and Andy Haines and Patricia Hartge and Johnni Hansen and Michael Hauptmann and Dick Heederik and Kari Hemminki and Denis Hemon and Irva Hertz-Picciotto and Hoppin, {Jane A.} and James Huff and Bengt Jarvholm and Daehee Kang and Karagas, {Margaret R.} and Kristina Kjaerheim and Helge Kjuus and Manolis Kogevinas and David Kriebel and Petter Kristensen and Hans Kromhout and Francine Laden and Pierre Lebailly and Grace Lemasters and Lubin, {Jay H.} and Lynch, {Charles F.} and Elsebeth Lynge and Andreat Mannetje and McMichael, {Anthony J.} and McLaughlin, {John R.} and Loraine Marrett and Marco Martuzzi and Merchant, {James A.} and Enzo Merler and Franco Merletti and Anthony Miller and Mirer, {Franklin E.} and Richard Monson and Nordby, {Karl Cristian} and Olshan, {Andrew F.} and Parent, {Marie Elise} and Perera, {Frederica P.} and Perry, {Melissa J.} and Pesatori, {Angela Cecilia} and Roberta Pirastu and Miquel Porta and Eero Pukkala and Carol Rice and Richardson, {David B.} and Leonard Ritter and Beate Ritz and Ronckers, {Cecile M.} and Lesley Rushton and Rusiecki, {Jennifer A.} and Ivan Rusyn and Samet, {Jonathan M.} and Sandler, {Dale P.} and {de Sanjose}, Silvia and Eva Schernhammer and Costantini, {Adele Seniori} and Noah Seixas and Carl Shy and Jack Siemiatycki and Silverman, {Debra T.} and Lorenzo Simonato and Smith, {Allan H.} and Smith, {Martyn T.} and Spinelli, {John J.} and Spitz, {Margaret R.} and Lorann Stallones and Stayner, {Leslie T.} and Kyle Steenland and Mark Stenzel and Stewart, {Bernard W.} and Stewart, {Patricia A.} and Elaine Symanski and Benedetto Terracini and Tolbert, {Paige E.} and Harri Vainio and John Vena and Roel Vermeulen and Victora, {Cesar G.} and Ward, {Elizabeth M.} and Weinberg, {Clarice R.} and Dennis Weisenburger and Catharina Wesseling and Elisabete Weiderpass and Zahm, {Shelia Hoar}",

year = "2015",

doi = "10.1289/ehp.1409149",

language = "English",

volume = "123",

pages = "507--514",

journal = "Environmental Health Perspectives",

issn = "0091-6765",

publisher = "Public Health Services, US Dept of Health and Human Services",

number = "6",

}

Pearce, N, Blair, A, Vineis, P, Ahrens, W, Andersen, A, Anto, JM, Armstrong, BK, Baccarelli, AA, Beland, FA, Berrington, A, Bertazzi, PA, Birnbaum, LS, Brownson, RC, Bucher, JR, Cantor, KP, Cardis, E, Cherrie, JW, Christiani, DC, Cocco, P, Coggon, D, Comba, P, Demers, PA, Dement, JM, Douwes, J, Eisen, EA, Engel, LS, Fenske, RA, Fleming, LE, Fletcher, T, Fontham, E, Forastiere, F, Frentzel-Beyme, R, Fritschi, L, Gerin, M, Goldberg, M, Grandjean, P, Grimsrud, TK, Gustavsson, P, Haines, A, Hartge, P, Hansen, J, Hauptmann, M, Heederik, D, Hemminki, K, Hemon, D, Hertz-Picciotto, I, Hoppin, JA, Huff, J, Jarvholm, B, Kang, D, Karagas, MR, Kjaerheim, K, Kjuus, H, Kogevinas, M, Kriebel, D, Kristensen, P, Kromhout, H, Laden, F, Lebailly, P, Lemasters, G, Lubin, JH, Lynch, CF, Lynge, E, Mannetje, A, McMichael, AJ, McLaughlin, JR, Marrett, L, Martuzzi, M, Merchant, JA, Merler, E, Merletti, F, Miller, A, Mirer, FE, Monson, R, Nordby, KC, Olshan, AF, Parent, ME, Perera, FP, Perry, MJ, Pesatori, AC, Pirastu, R, Porta, M, Pukkala, E, Rice, C, Richardson, DB, Ritter, L, Ritz, B, Ronckers, CM, Rushton, L, Rusiecki, JA, Rusyn, I, Samet, JM, Sandler, DP, de Sanjose, S, Schernhammer, E, Costantini, AS, Seixas, N, Shy, C, Siemiatycki, J, Silverman, DT, Simonato, L, Smith, AH, Smith, MT, Spinelli, JJ, Spitz, MR, Stallones, L, Stayner, LT, Steenland, K, Stenzel, M, Stewart, BW, Stewart, PA, Symanski, E, Terracini, B, Tolbert, PE, Vainio, H, Vena, J, Vermeulen, R, Victora, CG, Ward, EM, Weinberg, CR, Weisenburger, D, Wesseling, C, Weiderpass, E & Zahm, SH 2015, 'IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans', Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 123, no. 6, pp. 507-514. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409149

TY - JOUR

T1 - IARC monographs

T2 - 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans

AU - Pearce, Neil

AU - Blair, Aaron

AU - Vineis, Paolo

AU - Ahrens, Wolfgang

AU - Andersen, Aage

AU - Anto, Josep M.

AU - Armstrong, Bruce K.

AU - Baccarelli, Andrea A.

AU - Beland, Frederick A.

AU - Berrington, Amy

AU - Bertazzi, Pier Alberto

AU - Birnbaum, Linda S.

AU - Brownson, Ross C.

AU - Bucher, John R.

AU - Cantor, Kenneth P.

AU - Cardis, Elisabeth

AU - Cherrie, John W.

AU - Christiani, David C.

AU - Cocco, Pierluigi

AU - Coggon, David

AU - Comba, Pietro

AU - Demers, Paul A.

AU - Dement, John M.

AU - Douwes, Jeroen

AU - Eisen, Ellen A.

AU - Engel, Lawrence S.

AU - Fenske, Richard A.

AU - Fleming, Lora E.

AU - Fletcher, Tony

AU - Fontham, Elizabeth

AU - Forastiere, Francesco

AU - Frentzel-Beyme, Rainer

AU - Fritschi, Lin

AU - Gerin, Michel

AU - Goldberg, Marcel

AU - Grandjean, Philippe

AU - Grimsrud, Tom K.

AU - Gustavsson, Per

AU - Haines, Andy

AU - Hartge, Patricia

AU - Hansen, Johnni

AU - Hauptmann, Michael

AU - Heederik, Dick

AU - Hemminki, Kari

AU - Hemon, Denis

AU - Hertz-Picciotto, Irva

AU - Hoppin, Jane A.

AU - Huff, James

AU - Jarvholm, Bengt

AU - Kang, Daehee

AU - Karagas, Margaret R.

AU - Kjaerheim, Kristina

AU - Kjuus, Helge

AU - Kogevinas, Manolis

AU - Kriebel, David

AU - Kristensen, Petter

AU - Kromhout, Hans

AU - Laden, Francine

AU - Lebailly, Pierre

AU - Lemasters, Grace

AU - Lubin, Jay H.

AU - Lynch, Charles F.

AU - Lynge, Elsebeth

AU - Mannetje, Andreat

AU - McMichael, Anthony J.

AU - McLaughlin, John R.

AU - Marrett, Loraine

AU - Martuzzi, Marco

AU - Merchant, James A.

AU - Merler, Enzo

AU - Merletti, Franco

AU - Miller, Anthony

AU - Mirer, Franklin E.

AU - Monson, Richard

AU - Nordby, Karl Cristian

AU - Olshan, Andrew F.

AU - Parent, Marie Elise

AU - Perera, Frederica P.

AU - Perry, Melissa J.

AU - Pesatori, Angela Cecilia

AU - Pirastu, Roberta

AU - Porta, Miquel

AU - Pukkala, Eero

AU - Rice, Carol

AU - Richardson, David B.

AU - Ritter, Leonard

AU - Ritz, Beate

AU - Ronckers, Cecile M.

AU - Rushton, Lesley

AU - Rusiecki, Jennifer A.

AU - Rusyn, Ivan

AU - Samet, Jonathan M.

AU - Sandler, Dale P.

AU - de Sanjose, Silvia

AU - Schernhammer, Eva

AU - Costantini, Adele Seniori

AU - Seixas, Noah

AU - Shy, Carl

AU - Siemiatycki, Jack

AU - Silverman, Debra T.

AU - Simonato, Lorenzo

AU - Smith, Allan H.

AU - Smith, Martyn T.

AU - Spinelli, John J.

AU - Spitz, Margaret R.

AU - Stallones, Lorann

AU - Stayner, Leslie T.

AU - Steenland, Kyle

AU - Stenzel, Mark

AU - Stewart, Bernard W.

AU - Stewart, Patricia A.

AU - Symanski, Elaine

AU - Terracini, Benedetto

AU - Tolbert, Paige E.

AU - Vainio, Harri

AU - Vena, John

AU - Vermeulen, Roel

AU - Victora, Cesar G.

AU - Ward, Elizabeth M.

AU - Weinberg, Clarice R.

AU - Weisenburger, Dennis

AU - Wesseling, Catharina

AU - Weiderpass, Elisabete

AU - Zahm, Shelia Hoar

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Background: Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans. oBjectives: The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed. discussion: We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed. conclusions: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public’s health.

AB - Background: Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans. oBjectives: The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed. discussion: We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed. conclusions: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public’s health.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930511271&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1289/ehp.1409149

DO - 10.1289/ehp.1409149

M3 - Comment/debate

SN - 0091-6765

VL - 123

SP - 507

EP - 514

JO - Environmental Health Perspectives

JF - Environmental Health Perspectives

IS - 6

ER -

IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this