4.7 Article

Influence of the Levels of Arsenic, Cadmium, Mercury and Lead on Overall Survival in Lung Cancer

Journal

BIOMOLECULES
Volume 11, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom11081160

Keywords

heavy metals; cadmium; lung cancer prognosis; prognostic markers

Funding

  1. Science Stimulation Fund of the Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Poland [FSN426-05/18]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined the relationship between blood concentrations of heavy metals and overall survival in lung cancer patients, finding that low blood cadmium levels may be associated with improved overall survival in treated patients with lung cancer.
The effects of heavy metals on cancer risk have been widely studied in recent decades, but there is limited data on the effects of these elements on cancer survival. In this research, we examined whether blood concentrations of the heavy metals arsenic, cadmium, mercury and lead were associated with the overall survival of lung cancer patients. The study group consisted of 336 patients with lung cancer who were prospectively observed. Blood concentrations of heavy metals were measured to study the relationship between their levels and overall survival using Cox proportional hazards analysis. The hazard ratio of death from all causes was 0.99 (p = 0.94) for arsenic, 1.37 (p = 0.15) for cadmium, 1.55 (p = 0.04) for mercury, and 1.18 (p = 0.47) for lead in patients from the lowest concentration quartile, compared with those in the highest quartile. Among the patients with stage IA disease, this relationship was statistically significant (HR = 7.36; p < 0.01) for cadmium levels in the highest quartile (>1.97-7.77 mu g/L) compared to quartile I (0.23-0.57 mu g/L, reference). This study revealed that low blood cadmium levels <1.47 mu g/L are probably associated with improved overall survival in treated patients with stage IA disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available