Table Info

Table 1.

Proposed classification system to improve accuracy and clarity

Category	Current classification system	Proposed classification system
Group 1	Carcinogenic to humans	Agents that increase cancer risk in humans
Group 1	Tobacco smoke, plutonium, occupational exposure as a firefighter, solar radiation, etoposide, etc.	Tobacco smoke, plutonium, occupational exposure as a firefighter, excessive solar radiation, etoposide (beneficial under certain conditions), etc.
Group 2A	Probably carcinogenic to humans	Agents that probably increase cancer risk in humans
Group 2A	Consumption of red meat, acrolein, malathion, etc.	Excessive consumption of red meat, acrolein, malathion, etc.
Group 2B	Possibly carcinogenic to humans	Agents that possibly increase cancer risk in humans
Group 2B	Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, aspartame, digoxin, etc.	Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, aspartame, digoxin (beneficial under certain conditions), etc.
Group 3	Not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans	Agents with insufficient or no evidence for cancer risk in humans
Group 3	Diazepam, coffee drinking, tea, etc.	Diazepam, coffee drinking, tea, etc.

Current and proposed classification system for agents evaluated in the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs, with examples provided in each group to show how specific agents could be labeled

Declarations

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges his research team for helpful discussions.

Author contributions

MLL: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing.

Conflicts of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Copyright

Publisher’s note

Open Exploration maintains a neutral stance on jurisdictional claims in published institutional affiliations and maps. All opinions expressed in this article are the personal views of the author(s) and do not represent the stance of the editorial team or the publisher.

References

Samet JM, Chiu WA, Cogliano V, Jinot J, Kriebel D, Lunn RM, et al. The IARC Monographs: Updated Procedures for Modern and Transparent Evidence Synthesis in Cancer Hazard Identification. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020;112:30–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

Baan RA, Straif K. The Monographs Programme of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. A brief history of its Preamble. ALTEX. 2022;39:443–50. [DOI] [PubMed]

Schubauer-Berigan MK. Invited Perspective: Good Measure-Assessing the Impact of Cancer Hazard Identification on Policies for Cancer Prevention. Environ Health Perspect. 2023;131:121302. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

Rodriguez-Acevedo AJ, Green AC, Sinclair C, van Deventer E, Gordon LG. Indoor tanning prevalence after the International Agency for Research on Cancer statement on carcinogenicity of artificial tanning devices: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:849–59. [DOI] [PubMed]

IARC Monographs Preamble [Internet]. Lyon: IARC; [cited 2024 Nov 11]. Available from: https://monographs.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Preamble-2019.pdf

Stewart BW. Enhanced communication of IARC Monograph findings to better achieve public health outcomes. Carcinogenesis. 2021;42:159–68. [DOI] [PubMed]

Samet JM, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Lunn RM, Schubauer-Berigan MK. Commentary: Role and communications of cancer hazard determinations. Carcinogenesis. 2022;43:79–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

López-Lázaro M. Beneficial Dietary Agents Can Be Classified as Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1) under the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Protocol. [Preprint]. 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 11]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29980.91521 [DOI]

IARC Working Group on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Volume 100D. Lyon: IARC; 2012. pp. 1–341.

10.

IARC Working Group on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans. Occupational Exposure as a Firefighter. Lyon: IARC; 2023. pp. 1–730. [PubMed]

11.

Daniels RD, Kubale TL, Yiin JH, Dahm MM, Hales TR, Baris D, et al. Mortality and cancer incidence in a pooled cohort of US firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia (1950–2009). Occup Environ Med. 2014;71:388–97. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

12.

Lindqvist PG, Epstein E, Landin-Olsson M, Ingvar C, Nielsen K, Stenbeck M, et al. Avoidance of sun exposure is a risk factor for all-cause mortality: results from the Melanoma in Southern Sweden cohort. J Intern Med. 2014;276:77–86. [DOI] [PubMed]

13.

Lindqvist PG, Epstein E, Nielsen K, Landin-Olsson M, Ingvar C, Olsson H. Avoidance of sun exposure as a risk factor for major causes of death: a competing risk analysis of the Melanoma in Southern Sweden cohort. J Intern Med. 2016;280:375–87. [DOI] [PubMed]

14.

Alfredsson L, Armstrong BK, Butterfield DA, Chowdhury R, de Gruijl FR, Feelisch M, et al. Insufficient Sun Exposure Has Become a Real Public Health Problem. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:5014. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]

15.

Naddaf M. Aspartame is a possible carcinogen: the science behind the decision. Nature. 2023. [DOI] [PubMed]

16.

WHO Model List of Essential Medicines-23rd list, 2023 [Internet]. WHO; c2023 [cited 2024 Nov 11]. Available from: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/371090/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2023.02-eng.pdf?sequence=1