Premium
Is there an association between SV40 contaminated polio vaccine and lymphoproliferative disorders? An age–period–cohort analysis on Norwegian data from 1953 to 1997
Author(s) -
Thu Guri Olsen,
Hem Ling Yuan,
Hansen Svein,
Møller Bjørn,
Norstein Jarle,
Nøkleby Hanne,
Grotmol Tom
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
international journal of cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.475
H-Index - 234
eISSN - 1097-0215
pISSN - 0020-7136
DOI - 10.1002/ijc.21603
Subject(s) - medicine , norwegian , cohort , incidence (geometry) , lymphoma , immunology , cohort study , lymphoproliferative disorders , vaccination , cancer registry , polio vaccine , epidemiology , demography , philosophy , linguistics , physics , sociology , optics
Between 1955 and 1963, an estimated number of 150 million people in various parts of the world, including Norway, received poliomyelitis vaccine possibly contaminated with infectious simian virus 40 (SV40). Human studies have investigated the hypothesised association between SV40 and various cancers, but the results have so far been contradicting. The aim of the present study was to examine Norwegian cancer incidence data to assess a possible association between birth cohorts assumed to have been subjected to the vaccine and the incidence rate of lymphoproliferative disorders (excluding Hodgkin's lymphoma), further subdivided into non‐Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), lymphocytic leukemia and plasma cell neoplasms. Between 1953 and 1997, the incidence rate of lymphoproliferative diseases combined increased about 3‐fold in both males and females. Subgroup analysis showed that this increase was largely attributable to NHL. Age–period–cohort modelling of the subgroups, as well as of all groups combined, showed that the cohort effect was more prominent than the period effect. However, the variations in incidence patterns across the birth cohorts did not fit with the trends that would be expected if a SV40 contaminated vaccine did play a causative role. Thus, our data do not support the hypothesis of an association between the vaccine and any subgroup of lymphoproliferative diseases. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.