0
Original Investigation |

Antihypertensive Drugs and Lip Cancer in Non-Hispanic Whites FREE

Gary D. Friedman, MD, MS; Maryam M. Asgari, MD, MPH; E. Margaret Warton, MPH; James Chan, PharmD, PhD; Laurel A. Habel, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Division of Research (Drs Friedman, Asgari, and Habel and Ms Warton) and Pharmacy Outcomes Research Group (Dr Chan), Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, Oakland, California; and Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (Dr Friedman).


Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(16):1246-1251. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.2754.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background In screening pharmaceuticals for possible carcinogenic effects we noted an association between lip cancer risk and the photosensitizing antihypertensive drugs hydrochlorothiazide and nifedipine. In this study, we further characterized the risk of lip cancer associated with these and other commonly used antihypertensive drugs.

Methods In a comprehensive medical care program, we evaluated prescriptions dispensed and cancer occurrence from August 1, 1994, to February 29, 2008. We identified 712 patients with lip cancer (cases) and 22 904 comparison individuals (controls) matched for age, sex, and cohort year of entry in the susceptible group, non-Hispanic whites. We determined use, at least 2 years before diagnosis or control index date, of the commonly prescribed diuretics hydrochlorothiazide and hydrochlorothiazide combined with triamterene, the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril, the calcium channel blocker nifedipine, and the β-adrenergic blocker atenolol, the only nonphotosensitizer agent studied. We analyzed the use of each drug exclusively and regardless of use of the others, and focused on duration of use. Conditional logistic regression was used for analysis of matched case-control sets, with control for cigarette smoking.

Results At least a 5-year supply of a drug yielded the following odds ratios (95% CIs), respectively, compared with no use: hydrochlorothiazide, 4.22 (2.82-6.31); hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, 2.82 (1.74-4.55); lisinopril, 1.42 (0.95-2.13); nifedipine, 2.50 (1.29-4.84); and atenolol, 1.93 (1.29-2.91). When the other drugs were excluded, the odds ratio for atenolol was reduced to 0.54 (0.07-4.08).

Conclusion These data support an increased risk of lip cancer in non-Hispanic whites receiving treatment for hypertension with long-term use of photosensitizing drugs.

Figures in this Article

In screening pharmaceuticals for possible carcinogenic effects, an increased risk of cancer of the lip was identified in persons who received 3 or more prescriptions of the diuretic hydrochlorothiazide and the calcium channel blocker nifedipine.1 A causal relationship is biologically plausible because sun exposure is an established risk factor for lip cancer2 and hydrochlorothiazide and nifedipine are photosensitizers.3,4 For the present study, we conducted more extensive analyses of the risk of lip cancer in relation to hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine, and the following other commonly used antihypertensive drugs: the combination of hydrochlorothiazide with triamterene, a potassium-sparing diuretic; lisinopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; and atenolol, a β-adrenergic blocker. In addition to hydrochlorothiazide and nifedipine, triamterene is an established photosensitizer, and lisinopril is likely to be a photosensitizer; atenolol is not recognized as such.4,5 Associations were analyzed by the number of prescriptions received and duration of use of the drug with adjustment for cigarette smoking, a known risk factor for lip cancer.

COHORT AND DRUG SELECTION

The study cohort consisted of subscribers of the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program in northern California from August 1994, when all of the program's pharmacies had begun computer storage of dispensed prescriptions, through February 2008. Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program is a comprehensive integrated health care program. The population served is centered in the San Francisco Bay area and central valley of California. The membership is approximately 3.2 million and is ethnically and socioeconomically diverse, with some underrepresentation of persons at the highest and lowest ends of the economic spectrum.6 The target cohort for the study was subscribers with at least partial coverage of payment for prescriptions (>90%). Ascertainment of cancer, including lip cancer, was through the program's cancer registry, which contributes to the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program (http://www.seer.cancer.gov).

Case-control analyses have been performed within this cohort, using conditional logistic regression implemented with commercial software (SAS, version 9.1.2).7 In the initial screening of commonly used drugs,1 up to 50 risk-set controls8 were randomly selected for each case, matched on age, sex, and year of entry into the cohort. Relative risk is represented by the odds ratio. The index date for cases is the date of cancer diagnosis and, for controls, the date that gives them equal follow-back time to cohort entry. Cohort entry is the date when at least partial drug coverage started if later than August 1, 1994. Duration of use of a drug is based on summing the number of days supplied recorded for each dispensed prescription in the pharmacy database. Our analyses allow for a lag period of 2 years so that drug exposure within 2 years before index date is ignored.

The drugs selected for study were, in this setting, by far the most commonly prescribed representatives of the 4 classes of antihypertensives listed in the program's formulary. Diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and β-adrenergic blockers were represented, respectively, by hydrochlorothiazide and combined hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, lisinopril, nifedipine, and atenolol. In the entire study cohort, the numbers of patients aged 20 years and older who received 3 or more prescriptions for these drugs were as follows: hydrochlorothiazide, 353 695; hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, 178 290; lisinopril, 567 620; nifedipine, 141 132; and atenolol, 415 638. Because more than 1 antihypertensive drug may be prescribed to achieve adequate blood pressure control, we assessed the risk associated with each of the single-drug preparations, both without regard to use of the others before the index date and excluding patients who received any of the others before the index date. Triamterene alone was rarely prescribed and the combination of lisinopril and hydrochlorothiazide was not prescribed frequently until the last year of case ascertainment. Therefore, these preparations were not analyzed.

CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE CONFOUNDERS

Race/ethnicity, human immunodeficiency virus infection, organ transplantation, and cigarette smoking were considered confounders. Organ transplantation followed by immunosuppressive drug therapy and human immunodeficiency virus infection increase the risk of lip cancer,912 and cases and controls with these conditions before the diagnosis or index date were excluded. Race/ethnicity was determined from demographic data sets in which approximately 81% of the data were derived from either administrative systems or self-report. The remainder were imputed on the basis of the last name and census tract, using the Bayesian Improved Surname and Geocoding algorithm.13 Categories were white/non-Hispanic, white/Hispanic, Asian, African American, other or multiracial, and unknown. We found very few cases and evidence of markedly reduced risk of lip cancer among all of the minority groups and therefore restricted the present analysis to non-Hispanic whites. Cigarette smoking status was based on computer-stored information collected at outpatient clinic visits starting in 1996. An algorithm (available on request) was applied to this information to determine, as well as possible, whether a person smoked at any time during the observation period between first use of the drug studied and the index date or, if not, whether he or she smoked formerly or never, or whether smoking status was unknown. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, Kaiser Foundation Research Institute.

In our initial screening analysis there were 812 patients with lip cancer (cases) aged 30 years and older and 40 434 individuals serving as controls (average, 49.8 controls per case). The step-by-step exclusion of organ transplant and HIV-positive patients and persons who were not of non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity led to a final study group of 712 cases and 22 904 controls (average, 32.2 controls per case). The disproportionately greater loss of controls was mainly the result of the relatively few nonwhites and Hispanic whites among cases compared with controls. The derivation and characteristics of participants in the current study are shown in the Figure and reported in Table 1. Almost all the cancers were squamous cell. Men predominated the participants by a ratio of approximately 3:1.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure. Derivation of study cases and controls. HIV indicates human immunodeficiency virus.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Characteristics of Lip Cancer Cases and Controls

The disproportionately greater exclusion of controls resulting from our race/ethnicity criteria also led to a mean age 2.4 years higher in controls than cases. Current cigarette smokers were relatively more frequent among cases, whereas former smokers and persons with unknown smoking habits were more frequent among controls. In the 4 analyses of single-drug use, exclusion of patients receiving other drugs resulted in 438 to 464 cases and 15 135 to 16 329 controls for analyses.

Three or more prescriptions were received by a higher proportion of cases vs controls for all the drugs studied except lisinopril only and atenolol, and the excess use in the cases was statistically significant, except for the smaller number of patients receiving hydrochlorothiazide only. The deficit of use of atenolol only by cases was statistically significant (Table 2). The percentages of individuals receiving each drug, regardless of use of the other drugs, were considerably larger than percentages of those using only that drug, indicating that many patients received more than 1 of these drugs (“all” vs “only” in Table 2).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Use of the Studied Antihypertensive Drugs by Lip Cancer Cases and Controlsa
MULTIVARIABLE ANALYSIS

When the analysis of hydrochlorothiazide was controlled for smoking habits, the results were hardly affected and restricting attention to users of hydrochlorothiazide only made little difference (Table 3). The increased susceptibility of cigarette smokers was confirmed, but reduced risk was observed in former smokers.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Analysis of Hydrochlorothiazide and Risk of Lip Cancer, Controlling for Cigarette Smoking

Findings for the other antihypertensive drugs unadjusted and adjusted for cigarette smoking are reported in Table 4. The odds ratios for smoking categories in the multivariable analyses of these drugs were very similar to those reported for hydrochlorothiazide (Table 3) (available on request). These analyses confirmed the statistically significant associations of hydrochlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, and nifedipine with lip cancer. Lisinopril's weaker association lost statistical significance when other drugs were excluded. Atenolol was not associated with increased risk and, when studied alone, was associated with reduced risk.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Analysis of Risk of Lip Cancer Associated With Receipt of 3 or More Prescriptions for Hydrochlorothiazide-Triamterene, Lisinopril, Nifedipine, and Atenolol, Unadjusted and Adjusted for Cigarette Smoking
ANALYSIS BY DURATION OF USE

The risk of lip cancer increased with the duration of use for hydrochlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, and nifedipine, with the relative risk associated with hydrochlorothiazide use for at least 5 years exceeding a 4-fold increase (Table 5). The risk for lisinopril was highest among individuals with 1 to 5 years of use. Risk was increased for patients who received a 5-year or more supply of atenolol. Since this finding was inconsistent with the observed lack of association noted with atenolol, the atenolol analysis was repeated, excluding patients who received any of the other drugs. The number of cases exposed to atenolol for at least 5 years fell from 29 to 1 and the odds ratio dropped below unity (Table 5). Of the 28 cases who had received other drugs, 24 had received hydrochlorothiazide with or without other drugs, 8 had received nifedipine with or without other drugs, and 19 had received lisinopril with or without other drugs.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. ORs of Developing Lip Cancer According to the Amount of Drugs Dispensed, Measured in Years Supply, Regardless of Whether Other Drugs Were Given

We found that the commonly used photosensitizing antihypertensive drugs hydrochlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, and nifedipine were associated with an increased risk of lip cancer. The risk seemed to rise with increasing duration of use and was unexplained by confounding by cigarette smoking. Nonphotosensitizing atenolol, when used alone, was not associated with increased risk. Findings for lisinopril, a photosensitizer, were equivocal.

Lip cancer includes malignant neoplasms of the vermilion border, commissure, and labial mucosa, but excludes cancers originating on the skin of the lip.2,14 The histologic type is predominantly squamous cell, and most lesions occur on the lower lip.2 Based on SEER data,15 the overall age-adjusted incidence in the United States in 2003-2007 was low, 0.7/100 000 per year, and the incidence in men (1.2) was 4 times that in women (0.3). The relative protection of women has been linked to less engagement in outdoor occupations and use of lipstick and other lip coatings.1618 The incidence in SEER was 8-fold higher in whites (0.8) than blacks (0.1). In fact, the incidence in black women was not calculated because there were fewer than 16 cases in the 5-year interval.15 We did not find published incidence data for other ethnicities. Lip cancer is usually detected and treated early and, as a result, regional metastases occur in only 5% to 7% of cases and distant metastases in only 0.5% to 2.0%19

The protection afforded by darker pigmentation and this cancer's more frequent occurrence on the lower lip correspond with the main known risk factor: prolonged sun exposure.2,18 Although pipe smoking was believed to be a risk factor in the past, it has become infrequent in our setting and findings concerning cigarette smoking have varied considerably and have been considered inconclusive.2,20,21 Our data confirmed current cigarette smoking as a risk factor. We did not expect former smokers to have a reduced risk and can only speculate that this finding was the result of chance or that persons who quit smoking also have relatively low sun exposure or some other protective characteristic. Also confirming cigarette smoking as a risk factor was that in the screening study1 the only drug associated with lip cancer other than hydrochlorothiazide and nifedipine was nicotine, mostly in skin patch form, which was prescribed as an aid to discontinuing smoking.

When we narrowed our focus to the susceptible group of non-Hispanic whites, we lost a disproportionate number of control subjects, which led to the mean age at index date of the controls being 2.4 years higher than that of the cases. Before the exclusions, the mean ages were virtually identical (cases, 66.95 years; controls, 66.84 years). This age discrepancy did not bias our results or require further adjustment, because conditional logistic regression analysis bases the odds ratio on the findings within each case plus matched controls risk set, where the ages were matched within 1 year.

We were unable to adjust for sun exposure, the most important lip cancer risk factor, along with relative lack of pigmentation of the lips. However, it does not seem likely that users of the antihypertensive drugs associated with lip cancer experience a great deal more sun exposure than nonusers or than users of atenolol. To account for the 2- to 4-fold associations observed for at least 5 years' use of hydrochlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide-triamterene, and nifedipine, a much greater than 2- to 4-fold difference in carcinogenic sun exposure would be required.22 Other than a few self-reports or case reports (http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/atenolol/photosensitivity+reaction), the absence of a scientifically established association of atenolol use alone with lip cancer adds specificity to these findings and suggests that hypertension, the condition being treated, is not responsible. There may also have been uncontrolled confounding based on different characteristics of patients related to the drug prescribed. Again, these differences would have to be strongly related to the risk of lip cancer to account for the associations that we observed.

Thiazide diuretics, triamterene, some angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and lisinopril are photosensitizing drugs.3,4,2325 Photosensitizing drugs are believed to absorb energy from UV and/or visible light, causing the release of electrons. This leads to the generation of reactive oxygen intermediates and free radicals, which damage DNA and other components of skin cells and produce an inflammatory response.24,25 The causation of squamous cell skin cancer by the treatment of psoriasis with repeated exposures to photosensitizing psoralen and UV radiation26 and the association of hydrochlorothiazide and other antihypertensive drugs with risk of squamous cell skin cancer27 support the biological plausibility of an increased risk of lip cancer caused by photosensitizing antihypertensive drugs. However, another study28 surprisingly found more evidence for an association of short- than long-term use of photosensitizing drugs with skin cancer.

We were unable to include basal cell and squamous cell skin cancers in this study because these diagnoses have not been recorded in our cancer registry. Melanoma is also related to sun exposure, but none of the antihypertensive drugs studied screened positive for an association with this cancer in the screening study.1 Melanoma has been more strongly associated with intermittent exposures, especially those producing sunburn, than with long-term exposure, so the timing of use of photosensitizing drugs could be an important consideration.29

In the study1 that brought our attention to antihypertensive drugs and lip cancer, the screening criteria for drug-cancer associations of interest were odds ratio for 3 or more prescriptions of at least 1.5 and greater than odds ratio for 1 prescription, as a rough indicator of dose-response, and P < .01. Hydrochlorothiazide and nifedipine met these criteria, but lisinopril did not because its odds ratio was 1.36 (P = .004) and the odds ratio for 1 prescription was 1.38. The findings regarding lisinopril in the present study were also weaker in that the clear positive association became only of borderline statistical significance when individuals who received other antihypertensive drugs were excluded.

One of the main reasons for the analysis of single-drug exposures was the unexpected finding of a positive association between 5 or more years' use of atenolol and lip cancer. These proved to be attributable to the associated use of the other antihypertensive drugs.

Because lip cancer is a relatively infrequent form of cancer, it is not surprising that associations with antihypertensive drugs have not been observed in large clinical trials of their efficacy. For example, 33 357 patients, mean age 66.9 years, were monitored for a mean of 4.9 years in the ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial) study30 Approximately half the participants were not non-Hispanic white and approximately half were women, who have a lower incidence of lip cancer than white men. However, if all 33 357 participants were white males aged 65 to 69 years whose overall annual incidence of oropharyngeal cancer in 2003-2007 was 55.1/100 000 person-years, of which 8% were lip cancers,15 approximately 7 lip cancers would have been expected during follow-up in all 3 treatment groups combined.

Although the relatively high odds ratios, the evidence for specificity, and the biological mechanism are consistent with a causal relationship, causality cannot usually be established by a single observational study such as ours. Further investigations are needed to confirm and characterize relationships between photosensitizing antihypertensive drugs and lip cancer.

A search of the clinical literature revealed considerable attention to the effects of photosensitivity on the skin,25,31,32 some attention on its effects on the eye,33,34 but little or no attention directed toward the lips, except for a listing of a few lip sunscreens in the review by Ting et al.35

Antihypertensive drugs are commonly prescribed36 and most are photosensitizing as are many other commonly prescribed drugs.3,4 Lip cancer is rare and an increased risk of its development is generally outweighed by the benefits of drugs that are effective for other conditions. However, physicians prescribing photosensitizing drugs should ascertain whether patients are at high risk of lip cancer because of their fair skin and long-term sun exposure and discuss lip protection with them. Although not confirmed by clinical trials, likely preventive measures are simple: a hat with a sufficiently wide brim to shade the lips and lip sunscreens.

Accepted for Publication: April 11, 2012.

Published Online: August 6, 2012. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.2754

Correspondence: Gary D. Friedman, MD, MS, Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612.

Author Contributions: All the authors had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Friedman. Acquisition of data: Warton and Habel. Analysis and interpretation of data: Friedman, Asgari, Warton, Chan, and Habel. Drafting of the manuscript: Friedman. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Asgari, Warton, Chan, and Habel. Statistical analysis: Warton and Habel. Obtained funding: Habel. Administrative, technical, and material support: Asgari and Habel. Study supervision: Friedman.

Financial Disclosure: Dr Friedman has consulted for The Degge Group, Inc; Robinson Law Firm; Williams and Connolly Law Firm; and Allergan, Inc. None of these associations is related to, or has had any effect on, the present study. Dr Asgari and Ms Warton have a grant from Genentech, Inc, unrelated to and not affecting the present study. Dr Habel's research in the Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program has received support from Takeda, sanofi-aventis, Merck, and Genentech, Inc, that is unrelated to and not affecting the present study.

Funding/Support: The study was supported by grant R01 CA 098838 from the National Cancer Institute.

Previous Presentation: This study was presented as a scientific poster at the Bay Area Clinical Research Symposium; November 4, 2011; San Francisco, California.

Friedman GD, Udaltsova N, Chan J, Quesenberry CP Jr, Habel LA. Screening pharmaceuticals for possible carcinogenic effects: initial positive results for drugs not previously screened.  Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20(10):1821-1835
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mayne ST, Morse DE, Winn DM. Cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx. In: Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF Jr, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 674-696
Addo HA, Ferguson J, Frain-Bell W. Thiazide-induced photosensitivity: a study of 33 subjects.  Br J Dermatol. 1987;116(6):749-760
PubMed
Quintero B, Miranda MA. Mechanisms of photosensitization induced by drugs: a general survey.  Ars Pharmaceutica. 2000;41(1):27-46
Frishman WH, Brosnan BD, Grossman M, Dasgupta D, Sun DK. Adverse dermatologic effects of cardiovascular drug therapy: part II.  Cardiol Rev. 2002;10(5):285-300
PubMed
Krieger N. Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: validation and application of a census-based methodology.  Am J Public Health. 1992;82(5):703-710
PubMed
SAS Institute Inc.  SAS Online Doc 9.1.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 2004
Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern Epidemiology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008:125
Frisch M, Biggar RJ, Engels EA, Goedert JJ.AIDS-Cancer Match Registry Study Group.  Association of cancer with AIDS-related immunosuppression in adults.  JAMA. 2001;285(13):1736-1745
PubMed
Grulich AE, van Leeuwen MT, Falster MO, Vajdic CM. Incidence of cancers in people with HIV/AIDS compared with immunosuppressed transplant recipients: a meta-analysis.  Lancet. 2007;370(9581):59-67
PubMed
van Leeuwen MT, Grulich AE, McDonald SP,  et al.  Immunosuppression and other risk factors for lip cancer after kidney transplantation.  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18(2):561-569
PubMed
Collett D, Mumford L, Banner NR, Neuberger J, Watson C. Comparison of the incidence of malignancy in recipients of different types of organ: a UK Registry audit.  Am J Transplant. 2010;10(8):1889-1896
PubMed
Elliott MN, Morrison PA, Fremont A, McCaffrey DM, Pantoja P, Lurie N. Using the Census Bureau's surname list to improve estimates of race/ethnicity and associated disparities.  Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2009;9(2):69-83
Fritz A, Percy C, Jack A,  et al.  International Classification of Diseases for Oncology. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2000
Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M,  et al.  SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2007. eds. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results web site. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2007/. Accessed September 10, 2011
Pogoda JM, Preston-Martin S. Solar radiation, lip protection, and lip cancer risk in Los Angeles County women (California, United States).  Cancer Causes Control. 1996;7(4):458-463
PubMed
Moore SR, Johnson NW, Pierce AM, Wilson DF. The epidemiology of lip cancer: a review of global incidence and aetiology.  Oral Dis. 1999;5(3):185-195
PubMed
Gallagher RP, Lee TK, Bajdik CD, Borugian M. Ultraviolet radiation.  Chronic Dis Can. 2010;29:(suppl 1)  51-68
PubMed
Betka J. Distant metastases from lip and oral cavity cancer.  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2001;63(4):217-221
PubMed
Doll R. Cancers weakly related to smoking.  Br Med Bull. 1996;52(1):35-49
PubMed
Surgeon General.  Smoking and Health. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service; 1979:1321-1323
Bross IDJ. Spurious effects from an extraneous variable.  J Chronic Dis. 1966;19(6):637-647
PubMed
Diffey BL, Langtry J. Phototoxic potential of thiazide diuretics in normal subjects.  Arch Dermatol. 1989;125(10):1355-1358
PubMed
Moore DE. Drug-induced cutaneous photosensitivity: incidence, mechanism, prevention and management.  Drug Saf. 2002;25(5):345-372
PubMed
Gould JW, Mercurio MG, Elmets CA. Cutaneous photosensitivity diseases induced by exogenous agents.  J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995;33(4):551-576
PubMed
Stern RS. Photocarcinogenicity of drugs.  Toxicol Lett. 1998;102-103:389-392
PubMed
Jensen AO, Thomsen HF, Engebjerg MC, Olesen AB, Sørensen HT, Karagas MR. Use of photosensitising diuretics and risk of skin cancer: a population-based case-control study.  Br J Cancer. 2008;99(9):1522-1528
PubMed
Kaae J, Boyd HA, Hansen AV, Wulf HC, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M. Photosensitizing medication use and risk of skin cancer.  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(11):2942-2949
PubMed
Gruber SB, Armstrong BK. Cutaneous and ocular melanoma. In: Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF Jr, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2006:1196-1229
ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group.  Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).  JAMA. 2002;288(23):2998-3007
PubMed
Epstein JH. Phototoxicity and photoallergy.  Semin Cutan Med Surg. 1999;18(4):274-284
PubMed
Lankerani L, Baron ED. Photosensitivity to exogenous agents.  J Cutan Med Surg. 2004;8(6):424-431
PubMed
Roberts JE. Screening for ocular phototoxicity.  Int J Toxicol. 2002;21(6):491-500
PubMed
Mauget-Faÿsse M, Quaranta M, Francoz N, BenEzra D. Incidental retinal phototoxicity associated with ingestion of photosensitizing drugs.  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2001;239(7):501-508
PubMed
Ting WW, Vest CD, Sontheimer R. Practical and experimental consideration of sun protection in dermatology.  Int J Dermatol. 2003;42(7):505-513
PubMed
Institute of Medicine.  Report on a population-based policy and systems change approach to prevent and control hypertension. 2010. http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/A-Population-Based-Policy-and-Systems-Change-Approach-to-Prevent-and-Control-Hypertension.aspx. Accessed January 10, 2012

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure. Derivation of study cases and controls. HIV indicates human immunodeficiency virus.

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Characteristics of Lip Cancer Cases and Controls
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Use of the Studied Antihypertensive Drugs by Lip Cancer Cases and Controlsa
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Analysis of Hydrochlorothiazide and Risk of Lip Cancer, Controlling for Cigarette Smoking
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Analysis of Risk of Lip Cancer Associated With Receipt of 3 or More Prescriptions for Hydrochlorothiazide-Triamterene, Lisinopril, Nifedipine, and Atenolol, Unadjusted and Adjusted for Cigarette Smoking
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. ORs of Developing Lip Cancer According to the Amount of Drugs Dispensed, Measured in Years Supply, Regardless of Whether Other Drugs Were Given

References

Friedman GD, Udaltsova N, Chan J, Quesenberry CP Jr, Habel LA. Screening pharmaceuticals for possible carcinogenic effects: initial positive results for drugs not previously screened.  Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20(10):1821-1835
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Mayne ST, Morse DE, Winn DM. Cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx. In: Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF Jr, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 674-696
Addo HA, Ferguson J, Frain-Bell W. Thiazide-induced photosensitivity: a study of 33 subjects.  Br J Dermatol. 1987;116(6):749-760
PubMed
Quintero B, Miranda MA. Mechanisms of photosensitization induced by drugs: a general survey.  Ars Pharmaceutica. 2000;41(1):27-46
Frishman WH, Brosnan BD, Grossman M, Dasgupta D, Sun DK. Adverse dermatologic effects of cardiovascular drug therapy: part II.  Cardiol Rev. 2002;10(5):285-300
PubMed
Krieger N. Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: validation and application of a census-based methodology.  Am J Public Health. 1992;82(5):703-710
PubMed
SAS Institute Inc.  SAS Online Doc 9.1.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 2004
Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern Epidemiology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008:125
Frisch M, Biggar RJ, Engels EA, Goedert JJ.AIDS-Cancer Match Registry Study Group.  Association of cancer with AIDS-related immunosuppression in adults.  JAMA. 2001;285(13):1736-1745
PubMed
Grulich AE, van Leeuwen MT, Falster MO, Vajdic CM. Incidence of cancers in people with HIV/AIDS compared with immunosuppressed transplant recipients: a meta-analysis.  Lancet. 2007;370(9581):59-67
PubMed
van Leeuwen MT, Grulich AE, McDonald SP,  et al.  Immunosuppression and other risk factors for lip cancer after kidney transplantation.  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18(2):561-569
PubMed
Collett D, Mumford L, Banner NR, Neuberger J, Watson C. Comparison of the incidence of malignancy in recipients of different types of organ: a UK Registry audit.  Am J Transplant. 2010;10(8):1889-1896
PubMed
Elliott MN, Morrison PA, Fremont A, McCaffrey DM, Pantoja P, Lurie N. Using the Census Bureau's surname list to improve estimates of race/ethnicity and associated disparities.  Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2009;9(2):69-83
Fritz A, Percy C, Jack A,  et al.  International Classification of Diseases for Oncology. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2000
Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M,  et al.  SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2007. eds. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results web site. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2007/. Accessed September 10, 2011
Pogoda JM, Preston-Martin S. Solar radiation, lip protection, and lip cancer risk in Los Angeles County women (California, United States).  Cancer Causes Control. 1996;7(4):458-463
PubMed
Moore SR, Johnson NW, Pierce AM, Wilson DF. The epidemiology of lip cancer: a review of global incidence and aetiology.  Oral Dis. 1999;5(3):185-195
PubMed
Gallagher RP, Lee TK, Bajdik CD, Borugian M. Ultraviolet radiation.  Chronic Dis Can. 2010;29:(suppl 1)  51-68
PubMed
Betka J. Distant metastases from lip and oral cavity cancer.  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2001;63(4):217-221
PubMed
Doll R. Cancers weakly related to smoking.  Br Med Bull. 1996;52(1):35-49
PubMed
Surgeon General.  Smoking and Health. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service; 1979:1321-1323
Bross IDJ. Spurious effects from an extraneous variable.  J Chronic Dis. 1966;19(6):637-647
PubMed
Diffey BL, Langtry J. Phototoxic potential of thiazide diuretics in normal subjects.  Arch Dermatol. 1989;125(10):1355-1358
PubMed
Moore DE. Drug-induced cutaneous photosensitivity: incidence, mechanism, prevention and management.  Drug Saf. 2002;25(5):345-372
PubMed
Gould JW, Mercurio MG, Elmets CA. Cutaneous photosensitivity diseases induced by exogenous agents.  J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995;33(4):551-576
PubMed
Stern RS. Photocarcinogenicity of drugs.  Toxicol Lett. 1998;102-103:389-392
PubMed
Jensen AO, Thomsen HF, Engebjerg MC, Olesen AB, Sørensen HT, Karagas MR. Use of photosensitising diuretics and risk of skin cancer: a population-based case-control study.  Br J Cancer. 2008;99(9):1522-1528
PubMed
Kaae J, Boyd HA, Hansen AV, Wulf HC, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M. Photosensitizing medication use and risk of skin cancer.  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(11):2942-2949
PubMed
Gruber SB, Armstrong BK. Cutaneous and ocular melanoma. In: Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF Jr, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2006:1196-1229
ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group.  Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).  JAMA. 2002;288(23):2998-3007
PubMed
Epstein JH. Phototoxicity and photoallergy.  Semin Cutan Med Surg. 1999;18(4):274-284
PubMed
Lankerani L, Baron ED. Photosensitivity to exogenous agents.  J Cutan Med Surg. 2004;8(6):424-431
PubMed
Roberts JE. Screening for ocular phototoxicity.  Int J Toxicol. 2002;21(6):491-500
PubMed
Mauget-Faÿsse M, Quaranta M, Francoz N, BenEzra D. Incidental retinal phototoxicity associated with ingestion of photosensitizing drugs.  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2001;239(7):501-508
PubMed
Ting WW, Vest CD, Sontheimer R. Practical and experimental consideration of sun protection in dermatology.  Int J Dermatol. 2003;42(7):505-513
PubMed
Institute of Medicine.  Report on a population-based policy and systems change approach to prevent and control hypertension. 2010. http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/A-Population-Based-Policy-and-Systems-Change-Approach-to-Prevent-and-Control-Hypertension.aspx. Accessed January 10, 2012

Correspondence

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 2

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Topics
PubMed Articles