4.7 Article

Inverse association between melanoma and previous vaccinations against tuberculosis and smallpox:: Results of the FEBIM study

期刊

JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY
卷 119, 期 3, 页码 570-575

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1747.2002.00643.x

关键词

bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccine; case-control studies; epidemiology; melanoma; smallpox vaccine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various forms of immunotherapy utilizing bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccine or vaccinia vaccine have been evaluated in clinical trials on melanoma patients. The effect of the natural application of these vaccinations, administered to provide protection against tuberculosis and smallpox, has, however, never been studied in epidemiologic investigations on risk factors for melanoma. In a case-control study comprising 11 institutions in seven countries we recruited 603 incident melanoma cases and 627 population controls frequency matched to the cases with respect to sex, age, and ethnic origin within each center to assess this relationship to obtain insights into the prevention of melanoma. Exposure information, incorporating also detailed ascertainment of potential confounding variables, was obtained in standardized personal interviews at the study subject's home. We found an inverse association between melanoma risk and previous bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccine/vaccinia vaccination depicted by an adjusted odds ratio of 0.44 (95% confidence interval: 0.26-0.72) for those vaccinated against tuberculosis and smallpox compared with subjects without a positive history of either vaccination. A variety of subgroup analyses showing a consistent pattern of results make it unlikely that the observed inverse association is a spurious finding. We conclude that bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccination and vaccinia vaccination may lower melanoma risk. Current immunologic theory of melanoma development provides a sound basis for understanding the biologic plausibility of the findings that have to be confirmed in future studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据