BACKGROUND: Selecting priority occupational carcinogens is important for cancer prevention efforts; however, standardized selection methods are not available. The objective of this paper was to describe the methods used by CAREX Canada in 2015 to establish priorities for preventing occupational cancer, with a focus on exposure estimation and descriptive profiles. METHODS: Four criteria were used in an expert assessment process to guide carcinogen prioritization: (1) the likelihood of presence and/or use in Canadian workplaces; (2) toxicity of the substance (strength of evidence for carcinogenicity and other health effects); (3) feasibility of producing a carcinogen profile and/or an occupational estimate; and (4) special interest from the public/scientific community. Carcinogens were ranked as high, medium or low priority based on specific conditions regarding these criteria, and stakeholder input was incorporated. Priorities were set separately for the creation of new carcinogen profiles and for new occupational exposure estimates. RESULTS: Overall, 246 agents were reviewed for inclusion in the occupational priorities list. For carcinogen profile generation, 103 were prioritized (11 high, 33 medium, and 59 low priority), and 36 carcinogens were deemed priorities for occupational exposure estimation (13 high, 17 medium, and 6 low priority). CONCLUSION: Prioritizing and ranking occupational carcinogens is required for a variety of purposes, including research, resource allocation at different jurisdictional levels, calculations of occupational cancer burden, and planning of CAREX-type projects in different countries. This paper outlines how this process was achieved in Canada; this may provide a model for other countries and jurisdictions as a part of occupational cancer prevention efforts.
Canada ; Carcinogens ; Occupational Exposure ; Occupational Health ; Resource Allocation

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The type of sweet snack incorporated into an energy-restricted diet (ERD) may produce differential effects on metabolic improvements associated with body weight (BW) loss. This study compared effects of incorporating either twice daily energy-controlled dark chocolate snacks plus once daily sugar-free cocoa beverage (DC) to non-chocolate snacks plus sugar-free non-cocoa beverage (NC) into an ERD on BW loss and metabolic outcomes. MATERIALS/METHODS: In an 18-week randomized comparative trial, 60 overweight/obese premenopausal women were assigned to DC (n = 30) or NC group (n = 30). Dietary intake was measured at baseline and week 18, and BW, anthropometrics, blood pressure (BP) and serum glucose, insulin and lipid concentrations were measured at baseline, and weeks 6, 12 and 18. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Using intention-to-treat analysis, women in DC and NC groups reduced energy intake (both P < 0.001) and lost 4.4 +/- 0.6 kg and 5.0 +/- 0.9 kg (both P < 0.001), respectively. Both groups lowered systolic and diastolic BP [DC = 2.7 (P < 0.05), 2.7 (P < 0.01); NC = 3.4 (P < 0.01), 4.2 (P < 0.01) mmHg, respectively]. Glucose and insulin concentrations decreased by 0.72 mmol/L (P < 0.001) and 13.20 pmol/L (P < 0.01) in DC group and by 0.83 mmol/L (P < 0.001) and 13.20 pmol/L (P < 0.01), respectively, in NC group. Total cholesterol increased in NC group (P < 0.05), with no significant lipid changes in DC group. There were no significant differences in biomarker outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Overweight/obese premenopausal women following an 18-week ERD that included either DC or NC sweet snack and sugar-free beverage lost equivalent amounts of BW and improved BP measurements and glucose and insulin concentrations.
Beverages* ; Biomarkers* ; Blood Glucose ; Blood Pressure* ; Body Weight* ; Cacao ; Cholesterol ; Diet* ; Energy Intake ; Female ; Glucose ; Humans ; Insulin ; Obesity ; Snacks*