A peer-reviewed open access journal published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Among women, lung cancer mortality rates have surpassed those for breast cancer in several countries. This reflects the breast cancer mortality declines due to access to screening and effective treatment alongside the entrance of certain countries in stages of the tobacco epidemic in which smoking becomes more prevalent in women. In this study, we project lung and breast cancer mortality until 2030 in 52 countries. Cancer mortality data were obtained from the WHO Mortality Database. Age-standardized mortality rates (ASMR), per 100,000, were calculated (direct method) for 2008 to 2014 and projected for the years 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030 using a Bayesian log-linear Poisson model. In 52 countries studied around the world, between 2015 and 2030, the median ASMR are projected to increase for lung cancer, from 11.2 to 16.0, whereas declines are expected for breast cancer, from 16.1 to 14.7. In the same period, the ASMR will decrease in 36 countries for breast cancer and in 15 countries for lung cancer. In half of the countries analyzed, and in nearly three quarters of those classified as high-income countries, the ASMR for lung cancer has already surpassed or will surpass the breast cancer ASMR before 2030. The mortality for lung and breast cancer is higher in high-income countries than in middle-income countries; lung cancer mortality is lower in the latter because the tobacco epidemic is not yet widespread. Due to these observed characteristics of lung cancer, primary prevention should still be a key factor to decrease lung cancer mortality. Significance: The mortality for lung and breast cancer is projected to be higher in high-income countries than in middle-income countries, where lung cancer mortality is expected to surpass breast cancer mortality before 2030. Cancer Res; 78(15); 4436–42. ©2018 AACR.

The world of work is facing an ongoing pandemic and an economic downturn with severe effects worldwide. Workers trapped in precarious employment (PE), both formal and informal, are among those most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we call attention to at least 5 critical ways that the consequences of the crisis among workers in PE will be felt globally: (a) PE will increase, (b) workers in PE will become more precarious, (c) workers in PE will face unemployment without being officially laid off, (d) workers in PE will be exposed to serious stressors and dramatic life changes that may lead to a rise in diseases of despair, and (e) PE might be a factor in deterring the control of or in generating new COVID-19 outbreaks. We conclude that what we really need is a new social contract, where the work of all workers is recognized and protected with adequate job contracts, employment security, and social protection in a new economy, both during and after the COVID-19 crisis.

The prevalence of precarious employment has increased in recent decades and aspects such as employment insecurity and income inadequacy have intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify, appraise, and synthesise existing evidence pertaining to implemented initiatives addressing precarious employment that have evaluated and reported health and well-being outcomes. We used the PRISMA framework to guide this review and identified 11 relevant initiatives through searches in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and three sources of grey literature. We found very few evaluated interventions addressing precarious employment and its impact on the health and well-being of workers globally. Ten out of 11 initiatives were not purposefully designed to address precarious employment in general, nor specific dimensions of it. Seven out of 11 initiatives evaluated outcomes related to the occupational health and safety of precariously employed workers and six out of 11 evaluated worker health and well-being outcomes. Most initiatives showed the potential to improve the health of workers, although the evaluation component was often described with less detail than the initiative itself. Given the heterogeneity of the 11 initiatives regarding study design, sample size, implementation, evaluation, economic and political contexts, and target population, we found insufficient evidence to compare outcomes across types of initiatives, generalize findings, or make specific recommendations for the adoption of initiatives.

The aim is to identify trajectories of precarious employment (PE) over time in Sweden to examine associations of these with the subsequent risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. This is a nation-wide register-based cohort study of 1,583,957 individuals aged 40 to 61 years old residing in Sweden between 2003-2007. Trajectories of PE as a multidimensional construct and single PE components (contractual employment relationship, temporariness, income levels, multiple job holding, probability of coverage by collective agreements) were identified for 2003-2007 by means of group-based model trajectories. Risk Ratios (RR) for MI and stroke according to PE trajectories were calculated by means of generalized linear models with binomial family. Adjusted estimates showed that constant PE and borderline PE trajectories increased the risk of MI (RR: 1·08, CI95%:1·05-1·11 and RR:1·13, CI95%: 1·07-1·20 respectively) and stroke (RR:1·14, CI95%: 1·10-1·18 and HR:1·24, CI95%: 1·16-1·33 respectively) among men. A higher risk of stroke in men was found for the following unidimensional trajectories: former agency employees (RR:1·32, CI95%:1·04-1·68); moving from high to a low probability of having collective agreements (RR: 1·10, CI95%:1·01-1·20). Having constant low or very low income was associated to an increased risk of MI and Stroke for both men and women. The study findings provide evidence that PE increases the risk of stroke and possibly MI. It highlights the importance of being covered by collective bargaining agreements, being directly employed and having sufficient income levels over time. The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, no. 2019-01226.