Search

International audience; Objective The objective of the study was to investigate the joint effect of occupational exposure to asbestos, and tobacco and alcohol consumption, on the risk of laryngeal cancer among men. Methods We used data from a large population-based case–control study conducted in France. We estimated two-way and three-way interactions between asbestos exposure (never vs ever exposed), tobacco consumption (\textless20 vs ≥20 pack-years) and alcohol consumption (\textless5 vs ≥5 drinks per day). The interaction on an additive scale was assessed by estimating the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) and the attributable proportion due to interaction, and the interaction on a multiplicative scale was assessed by estimating the multiplicative interaction parameter (ψ). Multiplicative interactions were also assessed using fractional polynomials for alcohol drinking, tobacco smoking and asbestos exposure. Results When compared with light-to-moderate smokers and drinkers never exposed to asbestos, the increase in laryngeal cancer risk was smallest among light-to-moderate drinkers and smokers exposed to asbestos (OR=2.23 (1.08 to 4.60)), and highest among heavy smokers and drinkers ever exposed to asbestos (OR=69.39 (35.54 to 135.5)). We found an additive joint effect between asbestos exposure and alcohol consumption (RERI=4.75 (−4.29 to 11.12)), whereas we observed a more than additive joint effect between asbestos exposure and tobacco consumption (RERI=8.50 (0.71 to 23.81)), as well as between asbestos exposure, and tobacco and alcohol consumption (RERI=26.57 (11.52 to 67.88)). However, our results did not suggest any interaction on a multiplicative scale. Conclusions Our results suggest that asbestos exposure, in combination with tobacco and alcohol exposure, accounted for a substantial number of laryngeal cancer cases. Our findings therefore highlight the need for prevention in activities, such as construction work, where exposure to asbestos-containing materials remains

Objectives To assess the risk of lung cancer associated with exposure to mineral wools (MWs), while taking into account smoking, asbestos, and crystalline silica exposures. Methods The analyses were restricted to men (1350 cases and 1912 controls). Lifelong occupational history was collected. MWs and asbestos exposures were assessed, using task-exposure matrices and silica exposure, a job-exposure matrix. Results We observed consistent not-significant increased risks of lung cancer of the same order of magnitude among workers exposed to high levels of MWs (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval: 0.9 to 2.2; for highest quartile of the Cumulative Exposure Index). Conclusions These results do not allow to draw firm conclusion about a carcinogenic effect of MWs on the lung, but they cannot exclude it. Given the high number of potentially exposed workers, it will be necessary to replicate them in a future further removed from the asbestos ban.

Night work involving disruption of circadian rhythm was suggested as a possible cause of breast cancer. We examined the role of night work in a large population-based case-control study carried out in France between 2005 and 2008. Lifetime occupational history including work schedules of each night work period was elicited in 1,232 cases of breast cancer and 1,317 population controls. Thirteen percent of the cases and 11% of the controls had ever worked on night shifts (OR = 1.27 [95% confidence interval = 0.99–1.64]). Odds ratios were 1.35 [1.01–1.80] in women who worked on overnight shifts, 1.40 [1.01–1.92] in women who had worked at night for 4.5 or more years, and 1.43 [1.01–2.03] in those who worked less than three nights per week on average. The odds ratio was 1.95 [1.13–3.35] in women employed in night work for >4 years before their first full-term pregnancy, a period where mammary gland cells are incompletely differentiated and possibly more susceptible to circadian disruption effects. Our results support the hypothesis that night work plays a role in breast cancer, particularly in women who started working at night before first full-term pregnancy.

Background It has been suggested that certain occupational exposures may play a role in breast cancer etiology. The recognition of high-risk occupations may give clues about potential mammary carcinogens in the work place. Methods We conducted a population-based case–control study in France including 1,230 breast cancer cases and 1,315 population controls with detailed information on lifetime work history. Odds ratios for women ever employed in an occupation or industry were adjusted for well-established risk factors for breast cancer. Results Adjusted odds ratios were marginally increased in some white-collar occupations, as well as in textile workers (2.4; 95% CI [0.9–6.0]), rubber and plastics product makers (1.8; 95% CI [0.9–3.5]), and in women employed for more than 10 years as nurses (1.4; 95% CI [0.9–2.1]) and as tailors/dressmakers (1.5; 95% CI [0.9–2.6]). The incidence of breast cancer was increased among women employed in the manufacture of chemicals, of non-metallic mineral products, and decreased among women in agriculture. Conclusions These findings suggest a possible role of occupational exposures in breast cancer, including night-shift work, solvents and endocrine disrupting chemicals and require further studies with detailed assessment of occupational exposures. Am. J. Ind. Med. 54:499–509, 2011. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Objectives This work aims at assessing the risk of lung cancer associated with mineral wools (MW) currently used as a substitute for asbestos. They are suspected of increasing the risk of lung cancer because of their structure close to asbestos. Methods ICARE is a large multicentre population-based case-control study conducted between 2001 and 2006 in 10 French departments with a general cancer registry. ICARE includes 2926 incident lung cancer cases and 3555 controls with 78% of men. The subjects9 exposure to MW was first determined using a Job-Exposure Matrix (JEM) specific for MW. Then, individual exposure was assessed with an algorithm using specific questions on exposing tasks. We used unconditional logistic regression adjusted for age, department, number of job periods, lifelong cigarette smoking and exposure to asbestos (also assessed by a JEM and an algorithm). Results Analyses were conducted among men (2301 cases, 2780 controls) and concerned 27191 jobs. In the first analyses, we find significant associations between the risk of lung cancer and exposure to MW assessed with the JEM. They became non non-significant and close to 1 when adjusting for exposure to asbestos. In contrast, a significant dose-response relation was found between exposure to asbestos and the risk of lung cancer, even when adjusted for exposure to MW. Conclusions These results need to be completed with the exposure assessment from the algorithm. This algorithm would help us disentangle MW and asbestos exposure, which are closely related because of similar exposing jobs. Both results will be presented.