Amy L Hall1, Hans Kromhout2, Joachim Schüz1, Susan Peters2, Lützen Portengen2, Roel Vermeulen1, Antonio Agudo3, Wolfgang Ahrens4,5, Paolo Boffetta6,7, Paul Brennan1, Cristina Canova8, David I Conway9, Maria Paula Curado10, Alexander W Daudt11, Leticia Fernandez12, Mia Hashibe13, Claire M Healy14, Ivana Holcatova15, Kristina Kjaerheim16, Rosalina Koifman17, Pagona Lagiou18, Danièle Luce19, Gary J Macfarlane20, Ana Menezes21, Gwenn Menvielle22, Jerry Polesel23, Heribert Ramroth24, Lorenzo Richiardi25, Isabelle Stücker26, Peter Thomson27, Marta Vilensky28, Victor Wunsch-Filho29, Amy Lee Yuan-Chin13, Ariana Znaor1, Kurt Straif1, Ann Olsson1. 1. From the International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France. 2. Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. 3. Unit of Nutrition and Cancer, Cancer Epidemiology Research Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology-IDIBELL, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Bremen, Germany. 5. Faculty of Mathematics/Computer Science, Institute of Statistics, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany. 6. Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA. 7. Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 8. University of Padua, Padova, Italy. 9. School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Nursing, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom. 10. Epidemiology - CIPE/ACCAMARGO, Sao Paulo, Brazil. 11. Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 12. Institute of Oncology and Radiobiology, Havana, Cuba. 13. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA. 14. Trinity College School of Dental Science, Dublin, Ireland. 15. Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. 16. Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-based Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway. 17. Escola Nacional de Saude Publica, Fundacao Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 18. School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece. 19. Univ Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, Irset (Institut de recherche en santé, environnement et travail) - UMR_S 1085, Pointe-à-Pitre, France. 20. Epidemiology Group, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, United Kingdom. 21. Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil. 22. INSERM, Sorbonne Université, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique IPLESP, Paris, France. 23. Aviano Cancer Centre, Aviano, Italy. 24. University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 25. Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. 26. University Paris Sud, Paris Saclay University, UVSQ, CESP, INSERM, Environmental Epidemiology of Cancer Team, Villejuif, France. 27. University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 28. Institute of Oncology Angel H. Roffo, University of Buenos Aires, Argentina. 29. Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Various established occupational lung carcinogens are also suspected risk factors for laryngeal cancer. However, individual studies are often inadequate in size to investigate this relatively rare outcome. Other limitations include imprecise exposure assessment and inadequate adjustment for confounders. METHODS: This study applied a quantitative job exposure matrix (SYN-JEM) for four established occupational lung carcinogens to five case-control studies within the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium. We used occupational histories for 2256 laryngeal cancer cases and 7857 controls recruited from 1989 to 2007. We assigned quantitative exposure levels for asbestos, respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and chromium-VI and nickel combined (to address highly correlated exposures) via SYN-JEM. We assessed effects of occupational exposure on cancer risk for males (asbestos, respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and chromium-VI and nickel combined) and females (asbestos and respirable crystalline silica), adjusting for age, study, tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption, and asbestos exposure where relevant. RESULTS: Among females, odds ratios (ORs) were increased for ever versus never exposed. Among males, P values for linear trend were <0.05 for estimated cumulative exposure (all agents) and <0.05 for exposure duration (respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and chromium-VI and nickel combined); strongest associations were for asbestos at >90th percentile cumulative exposure (OR = 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0, 1.6), respirable crystalline silica at 30+ years duration (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.2, 1.7) and 75th-90th percentile cumulative exposure (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1, 1.8), chromium-VI at >75th percentile cumulative exposure (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.2, 3.0), and chromium-VI and nickel combined at 20-29 years duration (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1, 2.2). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support hypotheses of causal links between four lung carcinogens (asbestos, respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and nickel) and laryngeal cancer.
INTRODUCTION: Various established occupational lung carcinogens are also suspected risk factors for laryngeal cancer. However, individual studies are often inadequate in size to investigate this relatively rare outcome. Other limitations include imprecise exposure assessment and inadequate adjustment for confounders. METHODS: This study applied a quantitative job exposure matrix (SYN-JEM) for four established occupational lung carcinogens to five case-control studies within the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium. We used occupational histories for 2256 laryngeal cancer cases and 7857 controls recruited from 1989 to 2007. We assigned quantitative exposure levels for asbestos, respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and chromium-VI and nickel combined (to address highly correlated exposures) via SYN-JEM. We assessed effects of occupational exposure on cancer risk for males (asbestos, respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and chromium-VI and nickel combined) and females (asbestos and respirable crystalline silica), adjusting for age, study, tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption, and asbestos exposure where relevant. RESULTS: Among females, odds ratios (ORs) were increased for ever versus never exposed. Among males, P values for linear trend were <0.05 for estimated cumulative exposure (all agents) and <0.05 for exposure duration (respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and chromium-VI and nickel combined); strongest associations were for asbestos at >90th percentile cumulative exposure (OR = 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0, 1.6), respirable crystalline silica at 30+ years duration (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.2, 1.7) and 75th-90th percentile cumulative exposure (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1, 1.8), chromium-VI at >75th percentile cumulative exposure (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.2, 3.0), and chromium-VI and nickel combined at 20-29 years duration (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1, 2.2). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support hypotheses of causal links between four lung carcinogens (asbestos, respirable crystalline silica, chromium-VI, and nickel) and laryngeal cancer.
Authors: Francesca Bravi; Yuan-Chin Amy Lee; Mia Hashibe; Paolo Boffetta; David I Conway; Monica Ferraroni; Carlo La Vecchia; Valeria Edefonti Journal: Oral Dis Date: 2020-07-16 Impact factor: 3.511