H Langseth1, A Andersen. 1. Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Epidemiological Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway. HL@kreftreg.no
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to investigate cancer risk among women working in the Norwegian pulp and paper industry. The cohort included a total of 4,247 workers employed for at least one year between 1920 and 1993 (108,095 person-years), 85% of them as paper or administration workers. METHODS: The follow-up period for cancer was from 1953-1993. No data of exposure measurements were available. The analyses were based on comparisons of standard incidence ratios. The expected numbers of cancer cases were calculated using the five-year age-specific incidence rates for the entire female population. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, 380 new cases of cancer were observed vs. 322 expected (SIR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.07-1.30). An excess risk of ovarian cancer was found (SIR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.07-2.09). The SIR was highest among those younger than 55 years, and mostly among those working in paper departments. Short-term workers showed increased risk of lung and bladder cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Based on results from the present study, the increased risk of ovarian cancer is difficult to interpret, since existing knowledge of its etiology is limited. However, these women might have been exposed to various work-related agents such as talc, microbes, and different types of paper dust.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to investigate cancer risk among women working in the Norwegian pulp and paper industry. The cohort included a total of 4,247 workers employed for at least one year between 1920 and 1993 (108,095 person-years), 85% of them as paper or administration workers. METHODS: The follow-up period for cancer was from 1953-1993. No data of exposure measurements were available. The analyses were based on comparisons of standard incidence ratios. The expected numbers of cancer cases were calculated using the five-year age-specific incidence rates for the entire female population. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, 380 new cases of cancer were observed vs. 322 expected (SIR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.07-1.30). An excess risk of ovarian cancer was found (SIR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.07-2.09). The SIR was highest among those younger than 55 years, and mostly among those working in paper departments. Short-term workers showed increased risk of lung and bladder cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Based on results from the present study, the increased risk of ovarian cancer is difficult to interpret, since existing knowledge of its etiology is limited. However, these women might have been exposed to various work-related agents such as talc, microbes, and different types of paper dust.
Authors: Eva Andersson; Håkan Westberg; Ing-Liss Bryngelsson; Anders Magnuson; Bodil Persson Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2012-05-29 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Eva Andersson; Bodil Persson; Ing-Liss Bryngelsson; Anders Magnuson; Håkan Westberg Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2009-07-28 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Robin Taylor Wilson; Mark Donahue; Gloria Gridley; Johanna Adami; Laure El Ghormli; Mustafa Dosemeci Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: M Constanza Camargo; Leslie T Stayner; Kurt Straif; Margarita Reina; Umaima Al-Alem; Paul A Demers; Philip J Landrigan Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2011-06-03 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Won Jin Lee; Kay Teschke; Timo Kauppinen; Aage Andersen; Paavo Jäppinen; Irena Szadkowska-Stanczyk; Neil Pearce; Bodil Persson; Alain Bergeret; Luiz Augusto Facchini; Reiko Kishi; Danuta Kielkowski; Bo Andreassen Rix; Paul Henneberger; Jordi Sunyer; Didier Colin; Manolis Kogevinas; Paolo Boffetta Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: David McLean; Neil Pearce; Hilde Langseth; Paavo Jäppinen; Irena Szadkowska-Stanczyk; Bodil Persson; Pascal Wild; Reiko Kishi; Elsebeth Lynge; Paul Henneberger; Maria Sala; Kay Teschke; Timo Kauppinen; Didier Colin; Manolis Kogevinas; Paolo Boffetta Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 9.031