Exposure to pesticides and risk of Hodgkin lymphoma in an international consortium of agricultural cohorts (AGRICOH)

Purpose: Some pesticides may increase the risk of certain lymphoid malignancies, but few studies have examined Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). In this exploratory study, we examined associations between agricultural use of 22 individual active ingredients and 13 chemical groups and HL incidence. Methods: We used data from three agricultural cohorts participating in the AGRICOH consortium: the French Agriculture and Cancer Cohort (2005–2009), Cancer in the Norwegian Agricultural Population (1993–2011), and the US Agricultural Health Study (1993–2011). Lifetime pesticide use was estimated from crop-exposure matrices or self-report. Cohort-specific covariate-adjusted overall and age-specific (< 40 or ≥ 40 years) hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox regression and combined using random effects meta-analysis. Results: Among 316 270 farmers (75% male) accumulating 3 574 815 person-years at risk, 91 incident cases of HL occurred. We did not observe statistically significant associations for any of the active ingredients or chemical groups studied. The highest risks of HL overall were observed for the pyrethroids deltamethrin (meta-HR = 1.86, 95% CI 0.76–4.52) and esfenvalerate (1.86, 0.78–4.43), and inverse associations of similar magnitude were observed for parathion and glyphosate. Risk of HL at ≥ 40 years of age was highest for ever-use of dicamba (2.04, 0.93–4.50) and lowest for glyphosate (0.46, 0.20–1.07). Conclusion: We report the largest prospective investigation of these associations. Nonetheless, low statistical power, a mixture of histological subtypes and a lack of information on tumour EBV status complicate the interpretability of the results. Most HL cases occurred at older ages, thus we could not explore associations with adolescent or young adult HL. Furthermore, estimates may be attenuated due to non-differential exposure misclassification. Future work should aim to extend follow-up and refine both exposure and outcome classification

AGRICOH: A Consortium of Agricultural Cohorts

AGRICOH is a recently formed consortium of agricultural cohort studies involving 22 cohorts from nine countries in five continents: South Africa (1), Canada (3), Costa Rica (2), USA (6), Republic of Korea (1), New Zealand (2), Denmark (1), France (3) and Norway (3). The aim of AGRICOH, initiated by the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) and coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), is to promote and sustain collaboration and pooling of data to investigate the association between a wide range of agricultural exposures and a wide range of health outcomes, with a particular focus on associations that cannot easily be addressed in individual studies because of rare exposures (e.g., use of infrequently applied chemicals) or relatively rare outcomes (e.g., certain types of cancer, neurologic and auto-immune diseases). To facilitate future projects the need for data harmonization of selected variables is required and is underway. Altogether, AGRICOH provides excellent opportunities for studying cancer, respiratory, neurologic, and auto-immune diseases as well as reproductive and allergic disorders, injuries and overall mortality in association with a wide array of exposures, prominent among these the application of pesticides

Cancer incidence in agricultural workers: Findings from an international consortium of agricultural cohort studies (AGRICOH)

BACKGROUND: Agricultural work can expose workers to potentially hazardous agents including known and suspected carcinogens. This study aimed to evaluate cancer incidence in male and female agricultural workers in an international consortium, AGRICOH, relative to their respective general populations. METHODS: The analysis included eight cohorts that were linked to their respective cancer registries: France (AGRICAN: n = 128,101), the US (AHS: n = 51,165, MESA: n = 2,177), Norway (CNAP: n = 43,834), Australia (2 cohorts combined, Australian Pesticide Exposed Workers: n = 12,215 and Victorian Grain Farmers: n = 919), Republic of Korea (KMCC: n = 8,432), and Denmark (SUS: n = 1,899). For various cancer sites and all cancers combined, standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each cohort using national or regional rates as reference rates and were combined by random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: During nearly 2,800,000 person-years, a total of 23,188 cancers were observed. Elevated risks were observed for melanoma of the skin (number of cohorts = 3, meta-SIR = 1.18, CI: 1.01-1.38) and multiple myeloma (n = 4, meta-SIR = 1.27, CI: 1.04-1.54) in women and prostate cancer (n = 6, meta-SIR = 1.06, CI: 1.01-1.12), compared to the general population. In contrast, a deficit was observed for the incidence of several cancers, including cancers of the bladder, breast (female), colorectum, esophagus, larynx, lung, and pancreas and all cancers combined (n = 7, meta-SIR for all cancers combined = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.77-0.90). The direction of risk was largely consistent across cohorts although we observed large between-cohort variations in SIR for cancers of the liver and lung in men and women, and stomach, colorectum, and skin in men. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that agricultural workers have a lower risk of various cancers and an elevated risk of prostate cancer, multiple myeloma (female), and melanoma of skin (female) compared to the general population. Those differences and the between-cohort variations may be due to underlying differences in risk factors and warrant further investigation of agricultural exposures

Maternal occupation during pregnancy, birth weight, and length of gestation: Combined analysis of 13 European birth cohorts

Objectives We assessed whether maternal employment during pregnancy – overall and in selected occupational sectors – is associated with birth weight, small for gestational age (SGA), term low birth weight (LBW), length of gestation, and preterm delivery in a population-based birth cohort design. Methods We used data from >200 000 mother-child pairs enrolled in 13 European birth cohorts and compared employed versus non-employed women. Among employees, we defined groups of occupations representing the main sectors of employment for women where potential reproductive hazards are considered to be present. The comparison group comprised all other employed women not included in the occupational sector being assessed. We performed meta-analyses of cohort-specific estimates and explored heterogeneity. Results Employees had a lower risk of preterm delivery than non-employees [adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.81–0.91]. Working in most of the occupational sectors studied was not associated with adverse birth outcomes. Being employed as a nurse was associated with lower risk SGA infants (ORadj 0.91, 95% CI 0.84–0.99) whereas food industry workers had an increased risk of preterm delivery (ORadj 1.50, 95% CI 1.12–2.02). There was little evidence for heterogeneity between cohorts. Conclusions This study suggests that, overall, employment during pregnancy is associated with a reduction in the risk of preterm birth and that work in certain occupations may affect pregnancy outcomes. This exploratory study provides an important platform on which to base further prospective studies focused on the potential consequences of maternal occupational exposures during pregnancy on child development

Arbeidsplassen og sykefravær - Arbeidsforhold av betydning for sykefravær

Det var sterkeste evidens som er mulig ved observasjonsstudier, for at mekanisk eksponering generelt, repetitive bevegelser, bøying av nakke/rygg, kombinasjonen høye krav og lav kontroll, og trakassering/mobbing øker risiko for sykefravær. Det var sterkeste mulige evidens ved observasjonsstudier for at kontroll, kontroll over arbeidstid og positivt sosialt klima reduserer risikoen. Det var evidens for manglende sammenheng mellom krav og sykefravær. sykefravær, arbeid, arbeidsmiljø, eksponeringer, systematisk, litteraturgjennomgang

Hand-arm vibration exposure in rock drill workers. A comparison between measurements with hand-attached and tool-attached accelerometers

Objectives To assess the hazard of tool vibrations, we need valid exposure measurements. The use of hand-attached accelerometers (vibration sensors) to measure hand-arm vibrations (HAVs) has become a popular approach. However, according to International Standard ISO 5349-2, the preferred attachment of accelerometers is at the tool handle. We compared measures of HAV between hand- and tool-attached accelerometers in rock drilling. Methods We measured HAV in five rock drillers using jackleg drills in normal working operations with simultaneous measures of both hand-attached and tool-attached accelerometers. Five to seven measurement cycles of 15 s were executed on each worker, resulting in a total of 29 measurement cycles. To identify possible differences in working technique, we recorded videos of tool handle handgrips during drilling. Results There was a significant difference (9.5 m s−2; P ≤ 0.05) in vibration magnitudes measured by the tool-attached accelerometers compared with the hand-attached accelerometers. The hand-attached accelerometer showed a lower vibration magnitude for all workers (range of difference: 2.3–14.6). The variation between the two accelerometer attachments was larger between workers than within workers (ICC = 0.68). Conclusions For measurements of HAV from jackleg drills, the use of hand-attached accelerometers may cause a lower recorded vibration level compared with tool-attached accelerometers. This difference is likely to vary depending on how workers grip the tool handle, and a misclassification of exposure will occur if workers grip the tool handle in a way that makes the accelerometer lose contact with the vibrating surface. Individual differences in how workers grip the tool handles should be considered when assessing HAV

Hand-arm vibration exposure in rock drill workers. A comparison between measurements with hand-attached and tool-attached accelerometers

Objectives To assess the hazard of tool vibrations, we need valid exposure measurements. The use of hand-attached accelerometers (vibration sensors) to measure hand-arm vibrations (HAVs) has become a popular approach. However, according to International Standard ISO 5349-2, the preferred attachment of accelerometers is at the tool handle. We compared measures of HAV between hand- and tool-attached accelerometers in rock drilling. Methods We measured HAV in five rock drillers using jackleg drills in normal working operations with simultaneous measures of both hand-attached and tool-attached accelerometers. Five to seven measurement cycles of 15 s were executed on each worker, resulting in a total of 29 measurement cycles. To identify possible differences in working technique, we recorded videos of tool handle handgrips during drilling. Results There was a significant difference (9.5 m s−2; P ≤ 0.05) in vibration magnitudes measured by the tool-attached accelerometers compared with the hand-attached accelerometers. The hand-attached accelerometer showed a lower vibration magnitude for all workers (range of difference: 2.3–14.6). The variation between the two accelerometer attachments was larger between workers than within workers (ICC = 0.68). Conclusions For measurements of HAV from jackleg drills, the use of hand-attached accelerometers may cause a lower recorded vibration level compared with tool-attached accelerometers. This difference is likely to vary depending on how workers grip the tool handle, and a misclassification of exposure will occur if workers grip the tool handle in a way that makes the accelerometer lose contact with the vibrating surface. Individual differences in how workers grip the tool handles should be considered when assessing HAV.publishedVersio

Hand-arm vibration exposure in rock drill workers. A comparison between measurements with hand-attached and tool-attached accelerometers

Objectives To assess the hazard of tool vibrations, we need valid exposure measurements. The use of hand-attached accelerometers (vibration sensors) to measure hand-arm vibrations (HAVs) has become a popular approach. However, according to International Standard ISO 5349-2, the preferred attachment of accelerometers is at the tool handle. We compared measures of HAV between hand- and tool-attached accelerometers in rock drilling. Methods We measured HAV in five rock drillers using jackleg drills in normal working operations with simultaneous measures of both hand-attached and tool-attached accelerometers. Five to seven measurement cycles of 15 s were executed on each worker, resulting in a total of 29 measurement cycles. To identify possible differences in working technique, we recorded videos of tool handle handgrips during drilling. Results There was a significant difference (9.5 m s−2; P ≤ 0.05) in vibration magnitudes measured by the tool-attached accelerometers compared with the hand-attached accelerometers. The hand-attached accelerometer showed a lower vibration magnitude for all workers (range of difference: 2.3–14.6). The variation between the two accelerometer attachments was larger between workers than within workers (ICC = 0.68). Conclusions For measurements of HAV from jackleg drills, the use of hand-attached accelerometers may cause a lower recorded vibration level compared with tool-attached accelerometers. This difference is likely to vary depending on how workers grip the tool handle, and a misclassification of exposure will occur if workers grip the tool handle in a way that makes the accelerometer lose contact with the vibrating surface. Individual differences in how workers grip the tool handles should be considered when assessing HAV