133 research outputs found

    Association Between World Trade Center Exposure and Excess Cancer Risk

    Get PDF
    Context: The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, resulted in the release of known and suspected carcinogens into the environment. There is public concern that exposures may have resulted in increased cancers. Objective: To evaluate cancer incidence among persons enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Registry. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational study of 55 778 New York State residents enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Registry in 2003-2004, including rescue/recovery workers (n = 21 850) and those not involved in rescue/recovery (n = 33 928), who were followed up from enrollment through December 31, 2008. Within-cohort comparisons using Cox proportional hazards models assessed the relationship between intensity of World Trade Center exposure and selected cancers. Main Outcome Measures: Cases were identified through linkage with 11 state cancer registries. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, and sex were computed with 2003-2008 New York State rates as the reference, focusing on cancers diagnosed in 2007-2008 as being most likely to be related to exposure during September 11 and its aftermath. The total and site-specific incidence rate differences (RDs) per 100 000 person-years between the study population and the New York State population in 2007-2008 also were calculated. Results: There were 1187 incident cancers diagnosed, with an accumulated 253 269 person-years (439 cancers among rescue/recovery workers and 748 among those not involved in rescue/recovery). The SIR for all cancer sites combined in 2007-2008 was not significantly elevated (SIR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.30]; RD, 67 [95% CI, −6 to 126] per 100 000 person-years among rescue/recovery workers vs SIR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.03]; RD, −45 [95% CI, −106 to 15] per 100 000 person-years among those not involved in rescue/recovery). Among rescue/recovery workers, the SIRs had significantly increased by 2007-2008 for 3 cancer sites and were 1.43 (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.82) for prostate cancer (n = 67; RD, 61 [95% CI, 20 to 91] per 100 000 person-years), 2.02 (95% CI, 1.07 to 3.45) for thyroid cancer (n = 13; RD, 16 [95% CI, 2 to 23] per 100 000 person-years), and 2.85 (95% CI, 1.15 to 5.88) for multiple myeloma (n = 7; RD, 11 [95% CI, 2 to 14] per 100 000 person-years). No increased incidence was observed in 2007-2008 among those not involved in rescue/recovery. Using within-cohort comparisons, the intensity of World Trade Center exposure was not significantly associated with cancer of the lung, prostate, thyroid, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, or hematological cancer in either group. Conclusions: Among persons enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Registry, there was an excess risk for prostate cancer, thyroid cancer, and myeloma in 2007-2008 compared with that for New York State residents; however, these findings were based on a small number of events and multiple comparisons. No significant associations were observed with intensity of World Trade Center exposures. Longer follow-up for typically long-latency cancers and attention to specific cancer sites are needed

    The Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study: A Nested Case–Control Study of Lung Cancer and Diesel Exhaust

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND Most studies of the association between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer suggest a modest, but consistent, increased risk. However, to our knowledge, no study to date has had quantitative data on historical diesel exposure coupled with adequate sample size to evaluate the exposure-response relationship between diesel exhaust and lung cancer. Our purpose was to evaluate the relationship between quantitative estimates of exposure to diesel exhaust and lung cancer mortality after adjustment for smoking and other potential confounders. METHODS We conducted a nested case-control study in a cohort of 12 315 workers in eight non-metal mining facilities, which included 198 lung cancer deaths and 562 incidence density-sampled control subjects. For each case subject, we selected up to four control subjects, individually matched on mining facility, sex, race/ethnicity, and birth year (within 5 years), from all workers who were alive before the day the case subject died. We estimated diesel exhaust exposure, represented by respirable elemental carbon (REC), by job and year, for each subject, based on an extensive retrospective exposure assessment at each mining facility. We conducted both categorical and continuous regression analyses adjusted for cigarette smoking and other potential confounding variables (eg, history of employment in high-risk occupations for lung cancer and a history of respiratory disease) to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Analyses were both unlagged and lagged to exclude recent exposure such as that occurring in the 15 years directly before the date of death (case subjects)/reference date (control subjects). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS We observed statistically significant increasing trends in lung cancer risk with increasing cumulative REC and average REC intensity. Cumulative REC, lagged 15 years, yielded a statistically significant positive gradient in lung cancer risk overall (P (trend) = .001); among heavily exposed workers (ie, above the median of the top quartile [REC ≥ 1005 μg/m(3)-y]), risk was approximately three times greater (OR = 3.20, 95% CI = 1.33 to 7.69) than that among workers in the lowest quartile of exposure. Among never smokers, odd ratios were 1.0, 1.47 (95% CI = 0.29 to 7.50), and 7.30 (95% CI = 1.46 to 36.57) for workers with 15-year lagged cumulative REC tertiles of less than 8, 8 to less than 304, and 304 μg/m(3)-y or more, respectively. We also observed an interaction between smoking and 15-year lagged cumulative REC (P (interaction) = .086) such that the effect of each of these exposures was attenuated in the presence of high levels of the other. CONCLUSION Our findings provide further evidence that diesel exhaust exposure may cause lung cancer in humans and may represent a potential public health burden

    Carcinogenicity of cobalt, antimony compounds, and weapons-grade tungsten alloy

    Get PDF
    The complete evaluation of the carcinogenicity of cobalt, antimony compounds, and weapons-grade tungsten alloy will be published in Volume 131 of the IARC Monographs.[Excerpt] In March, 2022, a Working Group of 31 scientists from 13 countries met remotely at the invitation of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to finalise their evaluation of the carcinogenicity of nine agents: cobalt metal (without tungsten carbide or other metal alloys), soluble cobalt(II) salts, cobalt(II) oxide, cobalt(II,III) oxide, cobalt(II) sulfide, other cobalt(II) compounds, trivalent antimony, pentavalent antimony, and weapons-grade tungsten (with nickel and cobalt) alloy. For cobalt metal and the cobalt compounds, particles of all sizes were included in the evaluation. These assessments will be published in Volume 131 of the IARC Monographs.1 Cobalt metal and soluble cobalt(II) salts were classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A) based on “sufficient” evidence for cancer in experimental animals and “strong” mechanistic evidence in human primary cells. Cobalt(II) oxide and weapons-grade tungsten alloy were classified as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B) based on “sufficient” evidence in experimental animals. Trivalent antimony was classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A), based on “limited” evidence for cancer in humans, “sufficient” evidence for cancer in experimental animals, and “strong” mechanistic evidence in human primary cells and in experimental systems. Cobalt(II,III) oxide, cobalt(II) sulfide, other cobalt(II) compounds, and pentavalent antimony were each evaluated as “not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans” (Group 3).[...

    Quantification of ETS exposure in hospitality workers who have never smoked

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) was classified as human carcinogen (K1) by the German Research Council in 1998. According to epidemiological studies, the relative risk especially for lung cancer might be twice as high in persons who have never smoked but who are in the highest exposure category, for example hospitality workers. In order to implement these results in the German regulations on occupational illnesses, a valid method is needed to retrospectively assess the cumulative ETS exposure in the hospitality environment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A literature-based review was carried out to locate a method that can be used for the German hospitality sector. Studies assessing ETS exposure using biological markers (for example urinary cotinine, DNA adducts) or questionnaires were excluded. Biological markers are not considered relevant as they assess exposure only over the last hours, weeks or months. Self-reported exposure based on questionnaires also does not seem adequate for medico-legal purposes. Therefore, retrospective exposure assessment should be based on mathematical models to approximate past exposure.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For this purpose a validated model developed by Repace and Lowrey was considered appropriate. It offers the possibility of retrospectively assessing exposure with existing parameters (such as environmental dimensions, average number of smokers, ventilation characteristics and duration of exposure). The relative risk of lung cancer can then be estimated based on the individual cumulative exposure of the worker.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In conclusion, having adapted it to the German hospitality sector, an existing mathematical model appears to be capable of approximating the cumulative exposure. However, the level of uncertainty of these approximations has to be taken into account, especially for diseases with a long latency period such as lung cancer.</p
    corecore