Documents Blair, Aaron 10 results

"BACKGROUND:
To examine the association between occupation and leukaemia.
METHODS:
We interviewed 225 cases (aged 20-75 years) notified to the New Zealand Cancer Registry during 2003-04, and 471 controls randomly selected from the Electoral Roll collecting demographic details, information on potential confounders and a comprehensive employment history. Associations between occupation and leukaemia were analysed using logistic regression adjusted for gender, age, ethnicity and smoking.
RESULTS:
Elevated odds ratios (ORs) were observed in agricultural sectors including horticulture/fruit growing (OR: 2.62, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.51, 4.55), plant nurseries (OR: 7.51, 95% CI: 1.85, 30.38) and vegetable growing (OR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.18, 8.40); and appeared greater in women (ORs: 4.71, 7.75 and 7.98, respectively). Elevated ORs were also observed in market farmers/crop growers (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.02), field crop/vegetable growers (OR: 3.98, 95% CI: 1.46, 10.85), market gardeners (OR: 5.50, 95% CI: 1.59, 19.02), and nursery growers/workers (OR: 4.23, 95% CI: 1.34, 13.35); also greater in women (ORs: 3.48, 7.62, 15.74 and 11.70, respectively). These elevated ORs were predominantly for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). Several associations persisted after semi-Bayes adjustment. Elevated ORs were observed in rubber/plastics products machine operators (OR: 3.76, 95% CI: 1.08, 13.08), predominantly in plastic product manufacturing. CLL was also elevated in tailors and dressmakers (OR: 7.01, 95% CI: 1.78, 27.68), cleaners (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.00, 4.14) and builder's labourers (OR: 4.03, 95% CI: 1.30, 12.53).
CONCLUSIONS:
These findings suggest increased leukaemia risks associated with certain agricultural, manufacturing, construction and service occupations in New Zealand."

A study was conducted assessing the risk of nonHodgkin's lymphoma associated with exposure to lindane (58899), using data from population based studies of nonHodgkin's lymphoma among men in Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Minnesota. The data were obtained using telephone or personal interviews, were pooled, and odds ratios adjusted for age, state of residence, and type of interview were calculated using logistic regression analysis. A significant increase in the relative risk of nonHodgkin's disease was seen in subjects reporting agricultural use of lindane; the odds ratios were slightly higher in those first using lindane 20 or more years prior to diagnosis. Risk of the disease was not related to the use of protective equipment. Analysis of risk of nonHodgkin's lymphoma from lindane exposure adjusted for use of other pesticides or chemical classes did not result in large changes in the odds ratios. The risk of nonHodgkin's disease was greater from its use on crops than on animals. When analyzed by interview type, odds ratios for nonHodgkin's lymphoma were higher in subjects interviewed by proxy than in index respondents. The authors conclude that the agricultural use of lindane is associated with a 50% increase in the risk of nonHodgkin's lymphoma in this study. Possible reasons for this finding were discussed, including the possibility that the results were an artifact because the relative risk was reduced, but not completely eliminated, by adjusting for exposure to other pesticides.

"BackgroundThere are many proven and suspected occupational causes of lung cancer, which will become relatively more important over time, as smoking prevalence decreases.MethodsWe interviewed 457 cases aged 20–75 years notified to the New Zealand Cancer Registry during 2007–2008, and 792 population controls. We collected information on demographic details, potential confounders, and employment history. Associations were estimated using logistic regression adjusted for gender, age, ethnicity, smoking, and socio-economic status.ResultsAmong occupations of a priori interest, elevated odds ratios (ORs) were observed for sawmill, wood panel and related wood-processing plant operators (OR 4.63; 95% CI 1.05–20.29), butchers (OR 8.77, 95% CI 1.06–72.55), rubber and plastics products machine operators (4.27; 1.16–15.66), heavy truck drivers (2.24; 1.19–4.21) and workers in petroleum, coal, chemical and associated product manufacturing (1.80; 1.11–2.90); non-significantly elevated risks were also observed for loggers (4.67; 0.81–27.03), welders and flame-cutters (2.50; 0.86–7.25), pressers (5.74; 0.96–34.42), and electric and electronic equipment assemblers (3.61; 0.96–13.57). Several occupations and industries not of a priori interest also showed increased risks, including nursing associate professionals (5.45; 2.29–12.99), enrolled nurses (7.95; 3.10–20.42), care givers (3.47; 1.40–8.59), plant and machine operators and assemblers (1.61; 1.20–2.16), stationary machine operators and assemblers (1.67; 1.22–2.28), food and related products processing machine operators (1.98; 1.23–3.19), laborers and related elementary service workers (1.45; 1.05–2.00), manufacturing (1.34; 1.02–1.77), car retailing (3.08; 1.36–6.94), and road freight transport (3.02; 1.45–6.27).ConclusionsCertain occupations and industries have increased lung cancer risks in New Zealand, including wood workers, metal workers, meat workers, textile workers and drivers."

"OBJECTIVE: To assess trends in occupational cancer epidemiology research through a literature review of occupational health and epidemiology journals.
METHODS: Fifteen journals were reviewed from 1991 to 2009, and characteristics of articles that assessed the risk of cancer associated with an occupation, industry, or occupational exposure, were incorporated into a database.
RESULTS: The number of occupational cancer epidemiology articles published annually declined in recent years (2003 onwards) in the journals reviewed. The number of articles presenting dose-response analyses increased over the review period, from 29% in the first 4 years of review to 49% in the last 4 years.
CONCLUSION: There has been a decrease in the number of occupational cancer epidemiology articles published annually during the review period. The results of these articles help determine the carcinogenicity of workplace exposures and permissible exposure limits, both of which may be hindered with a decline in research."

"Background
Early-onset prostate cancer is often more aggressive and may have a different aetiology than later-onset prostate cancer, but has been relatively little studied to date. We evaluated occupation in relation to early- and later-onset prostate cancer in a large pooled study.
Methods
We used occupational information from census data in five Nordic countries from 1960 to 1990. We identified prostate cancer cases diagnosed from 1961 to 2005 by linkage of census information to national cancer registries and calculated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) separately for men aged 30–49 and those aged 50 or older. We also conducted separate analyses by period of follow-up, 1961–1985 and 1986–2005, corresponding to pre- and post-prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening.
Results
For early-onset prostate cancer (n = 1521), we observed the highest SIRs for public safety workers (e.g. firefighters) (SIR = 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23–2.31) and military personnel (SIR = 1.97, 95% CI: 1.31–2.85). These SIRs were significantly higher than the SIRs for later-onset disease (for public safety workers, SIR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.07–1.14 and for military personnel, SIR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.05–1.13; pheterogeneity = 0.005 and 0.002, respectively). Administrators and technical workers also demonstrated significantly increased risks for early-onset prostate cancer, but the SIRs did not differ from those of later-onset disease (pheterogeneity >0.05). While our early-onset finding for public safety workers was restricted to the post-PSA period, that for military personnel was restricted to the pre-PSA period.
Conclusion
Our results suggest that occupational exposures, particularly for military personnel, may be associated with early-onset prostate cancer. Further evaluation is needed to explain these findings."

"INTRODUCTION:
Since the early 1990s, researchers have been concerned with the low rate at which women are included in epidemiologic studies of occupational cancer. A previous evaluation determined that one-third of articles published between 1970 and 1990 included women.
METHODS:
To assess whether there has been an improvement in recent years, papers on occupational cancer between 1991 and 2009 were reviewed in fifteen journals.
RESULTS:
The proportion of articles that included men remained stable around 90%, while the proportion of articles that included women increased substantially, from 39% in 1991-1995 to 62% in 2006-2009. Articles that assessed risk among men only or men and women presented a higher number of risk estimates and were more likely to evaluate dose-response relationships than studies including women.
CONCLUSIONS:
Despite advances in the inclusion of women in studies of occupational cancer, disparities remain in the number of studies of occupational cancer and depth of analysis in studies that included women."

"Despite the considerable efforts and funds devoted to cancer research over several decades, cancer still remains a mainly lethal disease. Cancer incidence and mortality have not declined at the same rate as other major causes of death, indicating that primary prevention remains a most valuable approach to decrease mortality. There is general agreement that environmental exposures are variously involved in the causation of the majority of cancer cases and that at least half of all cancers could be avoided by applying existing etiologic knowledge. There is disagreement, however, regarding the proportion of cancer risks attributable to specific etiological factors, including diet, occupation and pollution. Estimates of attributable risks are largely based today on unverified assumptions and the calculation of attributable risks involves taking very unequal evidence of various types of factors and treating them equally. Effective primary prevention resulting in a reduction of cancer risk can be obtained by: (i) a reduction in the number of carcinogens to which humans are exposed; or (ii) a reduction of the exposure levels to carcinogens. Exposure levels that could be seen as sufficiently low when based on single agents, may actually not be safe in the context of the many other concomitant carcinogenic and mutagenic exposures. The list of human carcinogens and of their target organs might be quite different if: (i) epidemiological data were available for a larger proportion of human exposures for which there is experimental evidence of carcinogenicity; (ii) more attention was paid to epidemiological evidence that is suggestive of an exposure-cancer association, but is less than sufficient, particularly in identifying target organs; and (iii) experimental evidence of carcinogenicity, supported by mechanistic considerations, were more fully accepted as predictions of human risk."