Exposure to Trihalomethanes through Different Water Uses and Birth Weight, Small for Gestational Age, and Preterm Delivery in Spain

BACKGROUND Evidence associating exposure to water disinfection by-products with reduced birth weight and altered duration of gestation remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE We assessed exposure to trihalomethanes (THMs) during pregnancy through different water uses and evaluated the association with birth weight, small for gestational age (SGA), low birth weight (LBW), and preterm delivery. METHODS Mother-child cohorts set up in five Spanish areas during the years 2000-2008 contributed data on water ingestion, showering, bathing, and swimming in pools. We ascertained residential THM levels during pregnancy periods through ad hoc sampling campaigns (828 measurements) and regulatory data (264 measurements), which were modeled and combined with personal water use and uptake factors to estimate personal uptake. We defined outcomes following standard definitions and included 2,158 newborns in the analysis. RESULTS Median residential THM ranged from 5.9 μg/L (Valencia) to 114.7 μg/L (Sabadell), and speciation differed across areas. We estimated that 89% of residential chloroform and 96% of brominated THM uptakes were from showering/bathing. The estimated change of birth weight for a 10% increase in residential uptake was -0.45 g (95% confidence interval: -1.36, 0.45 g) for chloroform and 0.16 g (-1.38, 1.70 g) for brominated THMs. Overall, THMs were not associated with SGA, LBW, or preterm delivery. CONCLUSIONS Despite the high THM levels in some areas and the extensive exposure assessment, results suggest that residential THM exposure during pregnancy driven by inhalation and dermal contact routes is not associated with birth weight, SGA, LBW, or preterm delivery in Spain.

Bladder cancer index: cross-cultural adaptation into Spanish and psychometric evaluation.

BACKGROUND The Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) is so far the only instrument applicable across all bladder cancer patients, independent of tumor infiltration or treatment applied. We developed a Spanish version of the BCI, and assessed its acceptability and metric properties. METHODS For the adaptation into Spanish we used the forward and back-translation method, expert panels, and cognitive debriefing patient interviews. For the assessment of metric properties we used data from 197 bladder cancer patients from a multi-center prospective study. The Spanish BCI and the SF-36 Health Survey were self-administered before and 12 months after treatment. Reliability was estimated by Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was assessed through the multi-trait multi-method matrix. The magnitude of change was quantified by effect sizes to assess responsiveness. RESULTS Reliability coefficients ranged 0.75-0.97. The validity analysis confirmed moderate associations between the BCI function and bother subscales for urinary (r = 0.61) and bowel (r = 0.53) domains; conceptual independence among all BCI domains (r ≤ 0.3); and low correlation coefficients with the SF-36 scores, ranging 0.14-0.48. Among patients reporting global improvement at follow-up, pre-post treatment changes were statistically significant for the urinary domain and urinary bother subscale, with effect sizes of 0.38 and 0.53. CONCLUSIONS The Spanish BCI is well accepted, reliable, valid, responsive, and similar in performance compared to the original instrument. These findings support its use, both in Spanish and international studies, as a valuable and comprehensive tool for assessing quality of life across a wide range of bladder cancer patients.

Clinical intervals and diagnostic characteristics in a cohort of prostate cancer patients in Spain: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND Little is known about the healthcare process for patients with prostate cancer, mainly because hospital-based data are not routinely published. The main objective of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of prostate cancer patients, the, diagnostic process and the factors that might influence intervals from consultation to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment. METHODS We conducted a multicentre, cohort study in seven hospitals in Spain. Patients' characteristics and diagnostic and therapeutic variables were obtained from hospital records and patients' structured interviews from October 2010 to September 2011. We used a multilevel logistic regression model to examine the association between patient care intervals and various variables influencing these intervals (age, BMI, educational level, ECOG, first specialist consultation, tumour stage, PSA, Gleason score, and presence of symptoms) and calculated the odds ratio (OR) and the interquartile range (IQR). To estimate the random inter-hospital variability, we used the median odds ratio (MOR). RESULTS 470 patients with prostate cancer were included. Mean age was 67.8 (SD: 7.6) years and 75.4 % were physically active. Tumour size was classified as T1 in 41.0 % and as T2 in 40 % of patients, their median Gleason score was 6.0 (IQR:1.0), and 36.1 % had low risk cancer according to the D'Amico classification. The median interval between first consultation and diagnosis was 89 days (IQR:123.5) with no statistically significant variability between centres. Presence of symptoms was associated with a significantly longer interval between first consultation and diagnosis than no symptoms (OR:1.93, 95%CI 1.29-2.89). The median time between diagnosis and first treatment (therapeutic interval) was 75.0 days (IQR:78.0) and significant variability between centres was found (MOR:2.16, 95%CI 1.45-4.87). This interval was shorter in patients with a high PSA value (p = 0.012) and a high Gleason score (p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS Most incident prostate cancer patients in Spain are diagnosed at an early stage of an adenocarcinoma. The period to complete the diagnostic process is approximately three months whereas the therapeutic intervals vary among centres and are shorter for patients with a worse prognosis. The presence of prostatic symptoms, PSA level, and Gleason score influence all the clinical intervals differently.