A recent study published in JAMA Oncology has shed light on why around 12% of lung cancer patients have never smoked. Researchers from the Francis Crick Institute and University College London presented their findings at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, revealing that air pollution may be a significant factor in the development of lung cancer in non-smokers. While it has long been suspected that high levels of air pollution increase the risk of lung cancer, it was not clear whether pollution directly caused the disease or how it did so. The researchers investigated the impact of air pollution on the development of lung cancer by examining patient records, taking samples, and conducting animal experiments.
The study analyzed health data from 460,000 patients in England, South Korea, and Taiwan, revealing that higher levels of fine particulate matter in the air increased the risk of a mutation in the EGFR gene. The researchers also found that exposure to PM2.5 particles caused changes in the EGFR and KRAS genes, both of which are associated with lung cancer. The team also examined lung tissue samples from 250 people who lived in areas with low levels of air pollution and had never been exposed to tobacco smoke. They found mutations in the EGFR gene in 18% of the samples and mutations in the KRAS gene in 33% of the samples, despite the lungs being healthy. The researchers concluded that air pollution can cause an inflammatory response that triggers the development of lung cancer in cells affected by gene mutations.
In addition to providing an explanation for the development of lung cancer in non-smokers, the study also identified a potential new prevention method. The researchers found that an antibody could stop the production of the inflammatory messenger molecule interleukin 1 beta, which triggers the inflammatory response that leads to lung cancer. This discovery could lead to the development of a medication that could prevent the development of lung cancer in high-risk individuals. According to Charles Swanton, one of the study’s authors, this medication could take the form of a daily tablet.
