Frequency of Asbestos Exposure and Histological Subtype of Ovarian Carcinoma

The International Agency for Research on Cancer established a causal link between asbestos exposure and ovarian cancer. However, the exposure frequency and histological characteristics of asbestos-associated ovarian cancers remain to be investigated in detail. This multicenter case–case study assessed the asbestos exposure in ovarian carcinoma (OC) patients, alongside its association with histological subtype. Women were recruited in four hospitals in Lyon, France. Histological reports were reviewed by a pathologist. Patient and family members’ data were collected by phone-based questionnaires. Asbestos exposure was defined as direct (occupational and environmental) and indirect (via parents, partners, and children). An industrial hygienist assessed the probability and level of exposure. The 254 enrolled patients (mean age 60 years) reported having an average of 2.3 different jobs (mean working duration 29 years). The prevalence of direct and indirect asbestos exposure was 13% (mean exposure duration 11 years) and 46%, respectively. High-grade serous carcinoma accounted for 73% of all OCs and 82% of histological subtypes in women with direct exposure. After adjustment on a familial history of OC, no significant associations between asbestos exposure (direct and/or indirect) and high-grade serous carcinoma were found. Women with OC had a high prevalence of asbestos exposure. Establishing risk profiles, as reported here, is important in facilitating compensation for asbestos-related OCs and for the surveillance of women at risk

Under-estimation of self-reported occupational exposure by questionnaire in hospital workers.

International audienceOBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to determine whether self-reported occupational exposure to cleaning/disinfecting agents in hospital workers is accurate, in comparison to expert assessment, taken to be the gold standard. METHODS: In the Epidemiological Study of the Genetics and Environment of Asthma (EGEA), participants were interviewed on occupation with a specific questionnaire for hospital workers regarding tasks and cleaning/disinfecting agents. Two estimates of exposure were available: self-report and expert assessment. The expert assessment involved a standardised procedure to estimate intensity, frequency and probability of exposure for each job. The present analysis focused on eight exposures: formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, bleach/chlorine, alcohol, quaternary ammonium components, ammonia, sprays and latex gloves. Agreement and differences between self-reported and expert estimates were studied by kappa and phi coefficients and McNemar tests, respectively. RESULTS: In the survey of 1571 adults, 176 ever hospital workers (327 occupations) with both self-reported and expert exposure assessments were studied. An underestimation of self-reported exposure was observed especially for formaldehyde (26.5% vs 32.7%, p=0.01), ammonia (7.4% vs 18.8%, p<0.0001), alcohol (64.9% vs 93.0%, p<0.0001) and quaternary ammonium components (16.6% vs 70.9%, p<0.0001), compared to expert assessment. CONCLUSION: Occupational exposure to disinfecting/cleaning agents is common and high in hospitals. A large underestimation of self-reported exposure and a lack of knowledge of product components was observed. Our results show the relevance of expert assessment in epidemiological studies to limit measurement bias. This work underlines the need for health education programmes on the occupational risks induced by these types of products

Occupational Exposure to Diesel Motor Exhaust and Lung Cancer: A Dose-Response Relationship Hidden by Asbestos Exposure Adjustment? The ICARE Study

International audienceBackground. In a French large population-based case-control study we investigated the dose-response relationship between lung cancer and occupational exposure to diesel motor exhaust (DME), taking into account asbestos exposure. Methods. Exposure to DME was assessed by questionnaire. Asbestos was taken into account through a global indicator of exposure to occupational carcinogens or by a specific JEM. Results. We found a crude dose response relationship with most of the indicators of DME exposure, including with the cumulative exposure index. All results were affected by adjustment for asbestos exposure. The dose response relationships between DME and lung cancer were observed among subjects never exposed to asbestos. Conclusions. Exposure to DME and to asbestos is frequently found among the same subjects, which may explain why dose-response relationships in previous studies that adjusted for asbestos exposure were inconsistent