Nathalie Havet1, Alexis Penot2, Magali Morelle3, Lionel Perrier3, Barbara Charbotel4, Béatrice Fervers5. 1. Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, ISFA, Laboratoire SAF, Université de Lyon, 50 Avenue Tony Garnier, 69007, Lyon, France. nathalie.havet@univ-lyon1.fr. 2. ENS Lyon, GATE-UMR 5824-CNRS, Université de Lyon, 15 parvis René Descartes, BP 7000, 69347, Lyon Cedex 7, France. 3. Cancer Centre Léon Bérard, Direction de la Recherche Clinique et de l'innovation, GATE - UMR 5824-CNRS, Université de Lyon, 28 rue Laënnec, 69373, Lyon Cedex 08, France. 4. Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, IFSTTAR, UMRESTTE, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud Service des maladies professionnelles, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Université de Lyon, 8 avenue Rockefeller, 69373, Lyon Cedex 08, France. 5. Department Cancer and Environment, Université de Lyon, Centre Léon Bérard, 28 rue Laënnec, 69373, Lyon Cedex 08, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore varied exposure to carcinogenic, mutagenic, and reprotoxic chemicals (CMR) for French employees. METHODS: Our study assessed data from the French national cross-sectional survey of occupational risks (SUMER) that was conducted in 2010 in a national representative sample of employees. We selected 28 CMR agents that were classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer or European Union as being known or presumed to have CMR potential in humans. The association of individual and job characteristics with exposure prevalence, duration, and intensity of the CMR agents during a 1-week period was examined using multilevel logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 10.4% of employees in 2010 were exposed to one or more CMR agents at their workplace, and 3.4% were subjected to multiple CMR exposures. Blue-collar workers, night-shift workers and workers with short-term employment contracts experienced higher exposure prevalence (p < 0.01) and intensity (p < 0.05). Blue-collar workers and shift workers experienced also longer exposure duration (p < 0.001). Conversely, managers, workers of large companies, and women were less exposed to CMR agents (p < 0.001). The presence of a Committee for Health, Safety, and Working Conditions, and intervention by Occupational Health and Safety officers were significantly associated with reduced exposure intensities (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05). Establishment of European CMR regulations and the existence of an applicable substitution principle reduced the exposure duration (p < 0.001) and intensity (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results point out disparities in CMR exposure and identify high-priority targets for prevention measures to help reducing social health discrepancies.
PURPOSE: To explore varied exposure to carcinogenic, mutagenic, and reprotoxic chemicals (CMR) for French employees. METHODS: Our study assessed data from the French national cross-sectional survey of occupational risks (SUMER) that was conducted in 2010 in a national representative sample of employees. We selected 28 CMR agents that were classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer or European Union as being known or presumed to have CMR potential in humans. The association of individual and job characteristics with exposure prevalence, duration, and intensity of the CMR agents during a 1-week period was examined using multilevel logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 10.4% of employees in 2010 were exposed to one or more CMR agents at their workplace, and 3.4% were subjected to multiple CMR exposures. Blue-collar workers, night-shift workers and workers with short-term employment contracts experienced higher exposure prevalence (p < 0.01) and intensity (p < 0.05). Blue-collar workers and shift workers experienced also longer exposure duration (p < 0.001). Conversely, managers, workers of large companies, and women were less exposed to CMR agents (p < 0.001). The presence of a Committee for Health, Safety, and Working Conditions, and intervention by Occupational Health and Safety officers were significantly associated with reduced exposure intensities (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05). Establishment of European CMR regulations and the existence of an applicable substitution principle reduced the exposure duration (p < 0.001) and intensity (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results point out disparities in CMR exposure and identify high-priority targets for prevention measures to help reducing social health discrepancies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Carcinogenic; Health inequalities; Mutagenic; Occupational exposure; Reprotoxic chemicals
Authors: Beata Pepłońska; Weronika Burdelak; Agnieszka Bukowska; Jolanta Krysicka; Katarzyna Konieczko Journal: Int J Occup Med Environ Health Date: 2014-01-25 Impact factor: 1.843
Authors: Isabelle Niedhammer; Thomas Lesuffleur; Thomas Coutrot; Jean-François Chastang Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: J Ferlay; E Steliarova-Foucher; J Lortet-Tieulent; S Rosso; J W W Coebergh; H Comber; D Forman; F Bray Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Marlen Toch-Marquardt; Gwenn Menvielle; Terje A Eikemo; Ivana Kulhánová; Margarete C Kulik; Matthias Bopp; Santiago Esnaola; Domantas Jasilionis; Netta Mäki; Pekka Martikainen; Enrique Regidor; Olle Lundberg; Johan P Mackenbach Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-09-30 Impact factor: 3.240