BMJ  2005;330:265-266 (5 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7486.265

Editorial

More evidence on the risks of passive smoking

But existing evidence is enough to implicate it as a health hazard

Recently the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed more than 50 studies of passive smoking and lung cancer.¹ The pooled excess risk of lung cancer from exposure to spousal smoking was about 20% for women and 30% for men. So what do the two articles featured in this issue add to the evidence on the health hazards of passive smoking, which is already quite extensive (pp 277, 287)?^{2 3}

Compared with the large number of cases of lung cancer (about 6700) available for the IARC meta-analysis, the report from the EPIC study makes a relatively modest contribution (about 100 newly diagnosed cases).² The adjusted hazard ratio for lung cancer among people exposed to passive smoking was 1.70 (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 2.60). Some methodological limitations have been noted in previous studies of passive smoking, including inadequate control of confounding and misclassification of exposure—for example, the use of spousal smoking status as a proxy.⁴ The strengths of the EPIC study included its prospective design, control for potential confounding variables such as diet, and the ability to look for effect modification by polymorphisms in genes involved in carcinogenesis.

Some researchers have advocated using the naturally occurring phenomenon of Mendelian randomisation as an approach to get rid of the potential bias caused by omitted variables in studies of passive smoking and cancer.⁵ Mendelian randomisation occurs naturally during the formation of gametes and offspring and can sometimes provide a study design similar to randomised comparison. With respect to lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke, the goal is to identify the naturally occurring polymorphisms in genes that are associated with impaired detoxification of carcinogens present in tobacco smoke. In theory, these should be related to increased risk of cancer among people exposed to secondhand smoke, whereas "among people unexposed to the carcinogens in environmental tobacco smoke there is no reason to believe that the detoxification polymorphisms should be related to risk of lung cancer."⁵ The problem, however, is that these polymorphisms (including several examined in the EPIC study) are not specific to the carcinogens in tobacco smoke but are also involved in the metabolism of carcinogens derived from sources other than secondhand smoke.

An alternative approach, as yet untried, to identify the causal effect of passive smoking on risk of disease would be to take advantage of "policy randomisation" or natural experiments resulting from, for example, examining variations at the level of the city or state in the introduction of smoke free policies with respect to mortality risks among non-smokers.

A further aspect of the EPIC study deserves comment. Self reports of passive smoking in that study were strongly correlated with serum concentrations of cotinine, but the latter did not predict the risk of lung cancer. The authors say that cotinine is a poor biomarker of carcinogenic risk. Other studies have found that among non-smokers exposed to secondhand smoke, the urinary concentrations of carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds specific to tobacco smoke are 1-5% of those found in active smokers, which is roughly proportional to the excess risk of lung cancer reported in epidemiologic studies.⁶ In contrast to respiratory cancer, however, a recent study found an association between serum concentrations of cotinine in non-smokers and elevated risk of coronary heart disease (adjusted hazard ratio 1.57, 1.08 to 2.28), comparing the top to bottom fourth of cotinine concentrations.⁷

The second study in this issue examined the association between home exposure to secondhand smoke and all cause and cause specific mortality (p 287).³ The study, based in Hong Kong, was limited because of its retrospective assessment of passive smoking through proxy respondents and minimal adjustment for potential confounders. On the other hand, the study adds to the small but growing number of studies that implicate passive smoking as a cause of stroke.

The bottom line is, do these two studies change public policy in relation to restrictions on secondhand tobacco smoke? The answer is no. Existing evidence is already sufficient to implicate passive smoking as a cause of lung cancer and coronary heart disease. Moreover, smoke free workplace policies are effective in eliminating secondhand smoke and in encouraging active smokers to quit.⁸ Eliminating exposure to secondhand smoke is a public health priority not just for European countries but for the rest of the world as well.

Department of Society, Human Development and Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA (ckawach{at}aol.com)

---

Papers pp 277, 287

Competing interests: None declared.

References

1. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Tobacco smoking and involuntary smoking. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol 83. Lyons: IARC, 2004.
2. Vineis P, Airoldi L, Veglia F, Olgiati L, Pastorelli R, Autrup H, et al. Environmental tobacco smoke and risk of respiratory cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in former smokers and never smokers in the EPIC prospective study. BMJ 2005;330: 277-80.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. McGhee SM, Ho SY, Schooling M, Ho LM, Thomas GN, Hedley AJ, et al. Mortality associated with passive smoking in Hong Kong. BMJ 2005;330: 287-8.[Free Full Text]
4. Kawachi I, Colditz GA. Confounding, measurement error and publication bias in studies of passive smoking. Am J Epidemiol 1996;144: 909-15.[Free Full Text]
5. Davey Smith G. Effect of passive smoking on health. BMJ 2003;326: 1048-9.[Free Full Text]
6. Hecht SS. Human urinary carcinogen metabolites: biomarkers for investigating tobacco and cancer. Carcinogenesis 2002;23: 907-22.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Whincup PH, Gilg JA, Emberson JR, Jarvis MJ, Feyerabend C, Bryant A, et al. Passive smoking and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke: prospective study with cotinine measurement. BMJ 2004;329: 200-5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Fichtenberg CM, Glantz SA. Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: systematic review. BMJ 2002;325: 188-91.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Related Articles

Influence of Islam on smoking among Muslims

Nazim Ghouri, Mohammed Atcha, and Aziz Sheikh
BMJ 2006 332: 291-294. [Full Text] [PDF]

Legislation for smoke-free workplaces and health of bar workers in Ireland: before and after study

Shane Allwright, Gillian Paul, Birgit Greiner, Bernie J Mullally, Lisa Pursell, Alan Kelly, Brendan Bonner, Maureen D'Eath, Bill McConnell, James P McLaughlin, Diarmuid O'Donovan, Eamon O'Kane, and Ivan J Perry
BMJ 2005 331: 1117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Questions and answers

Kamran Abbasi
BMJ 2005 330: 0. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Environmental tobacco smoke and risk of respiratory cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in former smokers and never smokers in the EPIC prospective study

P Vineis, L Airoldi, F Veglia, L Olgiati, R Pastorelli, H Autrup, A Dunning, S Garte, E Gormally, P Hainaut, C Malaveille, G Matullo, M Peluso, K Overvad, A Tjonneland, F Clavel-Chapelon, H Boeing, V Krogh, D Palli, S Panico, R Tumino, B Bueno-De-Mesquita, P Peeters, G Berglund, G Hallmans, R Saracci, and E Riboli
BMJ 2005 330: 277. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Mortality associated with passive smoking in Hong Kong

S M McGhee, S Y Ho, M Schooling, L M Ho, G N Thomas, A J Hedley, K H Mak, R Peto, and T H Lam
BMJ 2005 330: 287-288. [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Panagiotakos, D. B, Pitsavos, C., Stefanadis, C. (2007). Chronic exposure to second hand smoke and 30-day prognosis of patients hospitalised with acute coronary syndromes: the Greek study of acute coronary syndromes. Heart 93: 309-312 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Ghouri, N., Atcha, M., Sheikh, A. (2006). Influence of Islam on smoking among Muslims. BMJ 332: 291-294 [Full text]  
• Allwright, S., Paul, G., Greiner, B., Mullally, B. J, Pursell, L., Kelly, A., Bonner, B., D'Eath, M., McConnell, B., McLaughlin, J. P, O'Donovan, D., O'Kane, E., Perry, I. J (2005). Legislation for smoke-free workplaces and health of bar workers in Ireland: before and after study. BMJ 331: 1117- [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Katz, J E (2005). Individual rights advocacy in tobacco control policies: an assessment and recommendation. Tobacco Control 14: ii31-ii37 [Abstract] [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Health Education--Essential step in controlling smoking and lung cancers

Riddhi Doshi
bmj.com, 5 Feb 2005 [Full text]