H V Jardel1, L S Engel2, K G Lawrence3, P A Stewart4, M R Stenzel5, M D Curry6, R K Kwok7, D P Sandler3. 1. Department of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: jahan1@ad.unc.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, DHHS, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 3. Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, DHHS, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 4. Stewart Exposure Assessments, LLC North Arlington, Virginia, USA. 5. Exposure Assessment Applications LLC Arlington, Virginia, USA. 6. Social and Scientific Systems, Inc., a DLH Holding Company Durham, NC, USA. 7. Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, DHHS, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; Office of the Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH, DHHS, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests relationships between some crude oil components and glycemic dysregulation, no studies have examined oil spill-related chemical exposures in relation to type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) risk. This study examined the relationship between total hydrocarbon (THC) exposure among workers involved in the 2010 Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill and risk of DM up to 6 years afterward. METHODS: Participants comprised 2660 oil-spill cleanup or response workers in the prospective GuLF Study who completed a clinical exam and had no self-reported DM diagnosis prior to the spill. Maximum THC exposure was estimated with a job-exposure matrix based on interview data and personal measurements taken during cleanup operations. We defined incident DM by self-reported physician diagnosis of DM, antidiabetic medication use, or a measured hemoglobin A1c value ≥ 6.5%. We used log binomial regression to estimate risk ratios (RRs) for DM across ordinal categories of THC exposure. The fully adjusted model controlled for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, employment status, and health insurance status. We also stratified on clinical body mass index categories. RESULTS: We observed an exposure-response relationship between maximum daily ordinal THC exposure level and incident DM, especially among overweight participants. RRs among overweight participants were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.37, 2.69), 1.46 (95% CI: 0.54, 3.92), and 2.11 (95% CI: 0.78, 5.74) for exposure categories 0.30-0.99 ppm, 1.00-2.99 ppm, and ≥3.00 ppm, respectively (ptrend = 0.03). CONCLUSION: We observed suggestively increasing DM risk with increasing THC exposure level among overweight participants, but not among normal weight or obese participants.
BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests relationships between some crude oil components and glycemic dysregulation, no studies have examined oil spill-related chemical exposures in relation to type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) risk. This study examined the relationship between total hydrocarbon (THC) exposure among workers involved in the 2010 Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill and risk of DM up to 6 years afterward. METHODS: Participants comprised 2660 oil-spill cleanup or response workers in the prospective GuLF Study who completed a clinical exam and had no self-reported DM diagnosis prior to the spill. Maximum THC exposure was estimated with a job-exposure matrix based on interview data and personal measurements taken during cleanup operations. We defined incident DM by self-reported physician diagnosis of DM, antidiabetic medication use, or a measured hemoglobin A1c value ≥ 6.5%. We used log binomial regression to estimate risk ratios (RRs) for DM across ordinal categories of THC exposure. The fully adjusted model controlled for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, employment status, and health insurance status. We also stratified on clinical body mass index categories. RESULTS: We observed an exposure-response relationship between maximum daily ordinal THC exposure level and incident DM, especially among overweight participants. RRs among overweight participants were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.37, 2.69), 1.46 (95% CI: 0.54, 3.92), and 2.11 (95% CI: 0.78, 5.74) for exposure categories 0.30-0.99 ppm, 1.00-2.99 ppm, and ≥3.00 ppm, respectively (ptrend = 0.03). CONCLUSION: We observed suggestively increasing DM risk with increasing THC exposure level among overweight participants, but not among normal weight or obese participants.
Authors: Yao-Zhong Liu; Astrid M Roy-Engel; Melody C Baddoo; Erik K Flemington; Guangdi Wang; He Wang Journal: Gene Date: 2015-12-09 Impact factor: 3.688
Authors: Betsy B Dokken; Vitoon Saengsirisuwan; John S Kim; Mary K Teachey; Erik J Henriksen Journal: Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Date: 2007-12-18 Impact factor: 4.310