Literature DB >> 31308155

Validity of retrospective occupational exposure estimates of lead and manganese in a case-control study.

Jean-François Sauvé1, Joemy M Ramsay1,2, Sarah J Locke1, Pamela J Dopart1, Pabitra R Josse1, Dennis D Zaebst3, Paul S Albert4, Kenneth P Cantor1, Dalsu Baris1, Brian P Jackson5, Margaret R Karagas6, Gm Monawar Hosain7, Molly Schwenn8, Alison Johnson9, Mark P Purdue1, Stella Koutros1, Debra T Silverman1, Melissa C Friesen1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The validity of surrogate measures of retrospective occupational exposure in population-based epidemiological studies has rarely been evaluated. Using toenail samples as bioindicators of exposure, we assessed whether work tasks and expert assessments of occupational metal exposure obtained from personal interviews were associated with lead and manganese concentrations.
METHODS: We selected 609 controls from a case-control study of bladder cancer in New England who had held a job for ≥1 year 8-24 months prior to toenail collection. We evaluated associations between toenail metal concentrations and five tasks extracted from occupational questionnaires (grinding, painting, soldering, welding, working near engines) using linear regression models. For 139 subjects, we also evaluated associations between the toenail concentrations and exposure estimates from three experts.
RESULTS: We observed a 1.9-fold increase (95% CI 1.4 to 2.5) in toenail lead concentrations with painting and 1.4-fold increase (95% CI 1.1 to 1.7) in manganese concentrations with working around engines and handling fuel. We observed significant trends with increasing frequency of both activities. For lead, significant trends were observed with the ratings from all three experts. Their average ratings showed the strongest association, with subjects rated as possibly or probably exposed to lead having concentrations that were 2.0 and 2.5 times higher, respectively, than in unexposed subjects (ptrend <0.001). Expert estimates were only weakly associated with manganese toenail concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the ability of experts to identify broad contrasts in previous occupational exposure to lead. The stronger associations with task frequency and expert assessments support using refined exposure characterisation whenever possible. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biological monitoring; lead; metals; retrospective exposure assessment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31308155      PMCID: PMC6767614          DOI: 10.1136/oemed-2019-105744

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Occup Environ Med        ISSN: 1351-0711            Impact factor:   4.402


  27 in total

1.  Long-term trends in occupational exposure: Are they real? What causes them? What shall we do with them?

Authors:  H Kromhout; R Vermeulen
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2000-08

2.  Validation of expert assessment of occupational exposures.

Authors:  Lin Fritschi; Louise Nadon; Geza Benke; Ramzan Lakhani; Benoit Latreille; Marie-Elise Parent; Jack Siemiatycki
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.214

3.  Trends in occupational lead exposure since the 1978 OSHA lead standard.

Authors:  Andrea Okun; Gregory Cooper; A John Bailer; James Bena; Leslie Stayner
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.214

4.  Investigation of job-related pesticide exposure in the third national health and nutrition examination survey.

Authors:  Ruth H Allen; David T Mage; Gauthami Gondy; Anuradha Kodali; Carol Christensen; Joseph Coble; Patricia Stewart
Journal:  Arch Environ Occup Health       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.663

5.  Retrospective assessment of occupational exposure to chemicals in community-based studies: validity and repeatability of industrial hygiene panel ratings.

Authors:  G Benke; M Sim; A Forbes; M Salzberg
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 7.196

6.  Reliability of an expert rating procedure for retrospective assessment of occupational exposures in community-based case-control studies.

Authors:  J Siemiatycki; L Fritschi; L Nadon; M Gérin
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.214

Review 7.  Evaluating temporal trends from occupational lead exposure data reported in the published literature using meta-regression.

Authors:  Dong-Hee Koh; Jun-Mo Nam; Barry I Graubard; Yu-Cheng Chen; Sarah J Locke; Melissa C Friesen
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2014-09-05

8.  Heavy metals found in the breathing zone, toenails and lung function of welders working in an air-conditioned welding workplace.

Authors:  Azian Hariri; Noraishah Mohamad Noor; Nuur Azreen Paiman; Ahmad Mujahid Ahmad Zaidi; Siti Farhana Zainal Bakri
Journal:  Int J Occup Saf Ergon       Date:  2017-09-22

Review 9.  Lead exposure in US worksites: A literature review and development of an occupational lead exposure database from the published literature.

Authors:  Dong-Hee Koh; Sarah J Locke; Yu-Cheng Chen; Mark P Purdue; Melissa C Friesen
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.214

10.  Toenail metal concentration as a biomarker of occupational welding fume exposure.

Authors:  Rachel Grashow; Jinming Zhang; Shona C Fang; Marc G Weisskopf; David C Christiani; Jennifer M Cavallari
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.155

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Using Decision Rules to Assess Occupational Exposure in Population-Based Studies.

Authors:  Jean-François Sauvé; Melissa C Friesen
Journal:  Curr Environ Health Rep       Date:  2019-09
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.