OBJECTIVES: Chlorinated solvents are classified as probable or possible carcinogens. It is unknown whether exposure to these agents increases the risk of malignant or benign brain tumours. Our objective was to evaluate associations of brain tumour risk with occupational exposure to six chlorinated solvents (i.e., dichloromethane, chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene). METHODS: 489 glioma cases, 197 meningioma cases and 799 controls were enrolled in a hospital-based case-control study conducted at three U.S.A. hospitals in Arizona, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Information about occupational history was obtained through a detailed inperson interview that included job-specific modules of questions such that the interview was tailored to each individual's particular work history. An industrial hygienist assessed potential solvent exposure based on this information and an exhaustive review of the relevant industrial hygiene literature. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to calculate OR and 95% CI for each solvent for ever/never, duration, cumulative, average weekly and highest exposure. RESULTS: Overall, we found no consistent evidence of an increased risk of glioma or meningioma related to occupational exposure to the six chlorinated solvents evaluated. There was some suggestion of an association between carbon tetrachloride and glioma in analyses restricted to exposed subjects, with average weekly exposure above the median associated with increased risk compared with below the median exposure (OR = 7.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 45.2). CONCLUSIONS: We found no consistent evidence for increased brain tumour risk related to chlorinated solvents.
OBJECTIVES: Chlorinated solvents are classified as probable or possible carcinogens. It is unknown whether exposure to these agents increases the risk of malignant or benign brain tumours. Our objective was to evaluate associations of brain tumour risk with occupational exposure to six chlorinated solvents (i.e., dichloromethane, chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene). METHODS: 489 glioma cases, 197 meningioma cases and 799 controls were enrolled in a hospital-based case-control study conducted at three U.S.A. hospitals in Arizona, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Information about occupational history was obtained through a detailed inperson interview that included job-specific modules of questions such that the interview was tailored to each individual's particular work history. An industrial hygienist assessed potential solvent exposure based on this information and an exhaustive review of the relevant industrial hygiene literature. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to calculate OR and 95% CI for each solvent for ever/never, duration, cumulative, average weekly and highest exposure. RESULTS: Overall, we found no consistent evidence of an increased risk of glioma or meningioma related to occupational exposure to the six chlorinated solvents evaluated. There was some suggestion of an association between carbon tetrachloride and glioma in analyses restricted to exposed subjects, with average weekly exposure above the median associated with increased risk compared with below the median exposure (OR = 7.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 45.2). CONCLUSIONS: We found no consistent evidence for increased brain tumour risk related to chlorinated solvents.
Authors: S E Carozza; M Wrensch; R Miike; B Newman; A F Olshan; D A Savitz; M Yost; M Lee Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2000-11-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Catharina Wesseling; Eero Pukkala; Kaisa Neuvonen; Timo Kauppinen; Paolo Boffetta; Timo Partanen Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Samuel M Goldman; Patricia J Quinlan; G Webster Ross; Connie Marras; Cheryl Meng; Grace S Bhudhikanok; Kathleen Comyns; Monica Korell; Anabel R Chade; Meike Kasten; Benjamin Priestley; Kelvin L Chou; Hubert H Fernandez; Franca Cambi; J William Langston; Caroline M Tanner Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: P D Inskip; R E Tarone; E E Hatch; T C Wilcosky; W R Shapiro; R G Selker; H A Fine; P M Black; J S Loeffler; M S Linet Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-01-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elizabeth M Ward; Paul A Schulte; Kurt Straif; Nancy B Hopf; Jane C Caldwell; Tania Carreón; David M DeMarini; Bruce A Fowler; Bernard D Goldstein; Kari Hemminki; Cynthia J Hines; Kirsti Husgafvel Pursiainen; Eileen Kuempel; Joellen Lewtas; Ruth M Lunn; Elsebeth Lynge; Damien M McElvenny; Hartwig Muhle; Tamie Nakajima; Larry W Robertson; Nathaniel Rothman; Avima M Ruder; Mary K Schubauer-Berigan; Jack Siemiatycki; Debra Silverman; Martyn T Smith; Tom Sorahan; Kyle Steenland; Richard G Stevens; Paolo Vineis; Shelia Hoar Zahm; Lauren Zeise; Vincent J Cogliano Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2010-06-18 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: A J De Roos; P A Stewart; M S Linet; E F Heineman; M Dosemeci; T Wilcosky; W R Shapiro; R G Selker; H A Fine; P M Black; P D Inskip Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Ana Navas-Acién; Marina Pollán; Per Gustavsson; Birgitta Floderus; Nils Plato; Mustafa Dosemeci Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Geza Benke; Michelle C Turner; Sarah Fleming; Jordi Figuerola; Laurel Kincl; Lesley Richardson; Maria Blettner; Martine Hours; Daniel Krewski; David McLean; Marie-Elise Parent; Siegal Sadetzki; Klaus Schlaefer; Brigitte Schlehofer; Jack Siemiatycki; Martie van Tongeren; Elisabeth Cardis Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Dongdong Lin; Ming Wang; Yan Chen; Jie Gong; Liang Chen; Xiaoyong Shi; Fujun Lan; Zhongliang Chen; Tao Xiong; Hu Sun; Shu Wan Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 6.244