Occupational exposures and cancer: a review of agents and relative risk estimates.

OBJECTIVES: The contribution of occupational exposures to the cancer burden can be estimated using population-attributable fractions, which is of great importance for policy making. This paper reviews occupational carcinogens, and presents the most relevant risk relations to cancer in high-income countries using France as an example, to provide a framework for national estimation of cancer burden attributable to occupational exposure. METHODS: Occupational exposures that should be included in cancer burden studies were evaluated using multiple criteria: classified as carcinogenic or probably carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs volumes 1-114, being a primary occupational exposure, historical and current presence of the exposure in France and the availability of exposure and risk relation data. Relative risk estimates were obtained from published systematic reviews and from the IARC Monographs. RESULTS: Of the 118 group 1 and 75 group 2A carcinogens, 37 exposures and 73 exposure-cancer site pairs were relevant. Lung cancer was associated with the most occupational carcinogenic exposures (namely, 18), followed by bladder cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ionising radiation was associated with the highest number of cancer sites (namely, 20), followed by asbestos and working in the rubber manufacturing industry. Asbestos, bis(chloromethyl)ether, nickel and wood dust had the strongest effect on cancer, with relative risks above 5. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of occupational exposures continues to impact the burden of cancer in high-income countries such as France. Information on types of exposures, affected jobs, industries and cancer sites affected is key for prioritising policy and prevention initiatives.

The future excess fraction model for calculating burden of disease.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of the burden of disease caused by a particular agent are used to assist in making policy and prioritizing actions. Most estimations have employed the attributable fraction approach, which estimates the proportion of disease cases or deaths in a specific year which are attributable to past exposure to a particular agent. While this approach has proven extremely useful in quantifying health effects, it requires historical data on exposures which are not always available. METHODS: We present an alternative method, the future excess fraction method, which is based on the lifetime risk approach, and which requires current rather than historical exposure data. This method estimates the future number of exposure-related disease cases or deaths occurring in the subgroup of the population who were exposed to the particular agent in a specific year. We explain this method and use publically-available data on current asbestos exposure and mesothelioma incidence to demonstrate the use of the method. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach to modelling burden of disease is useful when there are no historical measures of exposure and where future disease rates can be projected on person years at risk.

UK health performance: findings of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010.

BACKGROUND: The UK has had universal free health care and public health programmes for more than six decades. Several policy initiatives and structural reforms of the health system have been undertaken. Health expenditure has increased substantially since 1990, albeit from relatively low levels compared with other countries. We used data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2010 (GBD 2010) to examine the patterns of health loss in the UK, the leading preventable risks that explain some of these patterns, and how UK outcomes compare with a set of comparable countries in the European Union and elsewhere in 1990 and 2010. METHODS: We used results of GBD 2010 for 1990 and 2010 for the UK and 18 other comparator nations (the original 15 members of the European Union, Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA; henceforth EU15+). We present analyses of trends and relative performance for mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and healthy life expectancy (HALE). We present results for 259 diseases and injuries and for 67 risk factors or clusters of risk factors relevant to the UK. We assessed the UK's rank for age-standardised YLLs and DALYs for their leading causes compared with EU15+ in 1990 and 2010. We estimated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all measures. FINDINGS: For both mortality and disability, overall health has improved substantially in absolute terms in the UK from 1990 to 2010. Life expectancy in the UK increased by 4·2 years (95% UI 4·2-4·3) from 1990 to 2010. However, the UK performed significantly worse than the EU15+ for age-standardised death rates, age-standardised YLL rates, and life expectancy in 1990, and its relative position had worsened by 2010. Although in most age groups, there have been reductions in age-specific mortality, for men aged 30-34 years, mortality rates have hardly changed (reduction of 3·7%, 95% UI 2·7-4·9). In terms of premature mortality, worsening ranks are most notable for men and women aged 20-54 years. For all age groups, the contributions of Alzheimer's disease (increase of 137%, 16-277), cirrhosis (65%, ?15 to 107), and drug use disorders (577%, 71-942) to premature mortality rose from 1990 to 2010. In 2010, compared with EU15+, the UK had significantly lower rates of age-standardised YLLs for road injury, diabetes, liver cancer, and chronic kidney disease, but significantly greater rates for ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lower respiratory infections, breast cancer, other cardiovascular and circulatory disorders, oesophageal cancer, preterm birth complications, congenital anomalies, and aortic aneurysm. Because YLDs per person by age and sex have not changed substantially from 1990 to 2010 but age-specific mortality has been falling, the importance of chronic disability is rising. The major causes of YLDs in 2010 were mental and behavioural disorders (including substance abuse; 21·5% [95 UI 17·2-26·3] of YLDs), and musculoskeletal disorders (30·5% [25·5-35·7]). The leading risk factor in the UK was tobacco (11·8% [10·5-13·3] of DALYs), followed by increased blood pressure (9·0 % [7·5-10·5]), and high body-mass index (8·6% [7·4-9·8]). Diet and physical inactivity accounted for 14·3% (95% UI 12·8-15·9) of UK DALYs in 2010. INTERPRETATION: The performance of the UK in terms of premature mortality is persistently and significantly below the mean of EU15+ and requires additional concerted action. Further progress in premature mortality from several major causes, such as cardiovascular diseases and cancers, will probably require improved public health, prevention, early intervention, and treatment activities. The growing burden of disability, particularly from mental disorders, substance use, musculoskeletal disorders, and falls deserves an integrated and strategic response. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Occupational cancer in Britain. Statistical methodology.

An approach using the attributable fraction (AF) has been developed to estimate the current burden of occupational cancer in Britain. The AF combines the relative risk (RR) associated with exposure with the proportion exposed. For each cancer-exposure pairing, the RR is selected from key epidemiological literature such as an industry, or population-based study, meta-analysis or review. The CARcinogen EXposure (CAREX) database provides point estimates for the number of workers exposed to a range of carcinogens; alternative sources are national surveys such as the Labour Force Survey and Census of Employment. The number of workers exposed are split between high and low exposure levels matched to appropriate RRs from the literature. The relevant period for cancer development during which exposure occurred is defined as the risk exposure period (REP). Estimation of the numbers ever exposed over the REP takes into account the changes in the number of people employed in primary and manufacturing industry and service sectors in Britain where appropriate, and adjustment is made for staff turnover over the period and for life expectancy. National estimates of the population ever of working age during the REP are used for the proportion denominator. Strategies have been developed to combine exposure AFs correctly while avoiding double counting and minimising bias. The AFs are applied to national cancer deaths and registrations to obtain occupation-attributable cancer numbers. The methods are adaptable for other diseases and other geographies, and are also adaptable to more sophisticated modelling if better exposure and dose-response data are available.

Occupational cancer in Britain. Exposure assessment methodology.

To estimate the current occupational cancer burden due to past exposures in Britain, estimates of the number of exposed workers at different levels are required, as well as risk estimates of cancer due to the exposures. This paper describes the methods and results for estimating the historical exposures. All occupational carcinogens or exposure circumstances classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as definite or probable human carcinogens and potentially to be found in British workplaces over the past 20-40 years were included in this study. Estimates of the number of people exposed by industrial sector were based predominantly on two sources of data, the CARcinogen EXposure (CAREX) database and the UK Labour Force Survey. Where possible, multiple and overlapping exposures were taken into account. Dose-response risk estimates were generally not available in the epidemiological literature for the cancer-exposure pairs in this study, and none of the sources available for obtaining the numbers exposed provided data by different levels of exposure. Industrial sectors were therefore assigned using expert judgement to 'higher'- and 'lower'-exposure groups based on the similarity of exposure to the population in the key epidemiological studies from which risk estimates had been selected. Estimates of historical exposure prevalence were obtained for 41 carcinogens or occupational circumstances. These include exposures to chemicals and metals, combustion products, other mixtures or groups of chemicals, mineral and biological dusts, physical agents and work patterns, as well as occupations and industries that have been associated with increased risk of cancer, but for which the causative agents are unknown. There were more than half a million workers exposed to each of six carcinogens (radon, solar radiation, crystalline silica, mineral oils, non-arsenical insecticides and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin); other agents to which a large number of workers are exposed included benzene, diesel engine exhaust and environmental tobacco smoke. The study has highlighted several industrial sectors with large proportions of workers potentially exposed to multiple carcinogens. The relevant available data have been used to generate estimates of the prevalence of past exposure to occupational carcinogens to enable the occupational cancer burden in Britain to be estimated. These data are considered adequate for the present purpose, but new data on the prevalence and intensity of current occupational exposure to carcinogens should be collected to ensure that future policy decisions be based on reliable evidence.

Occupational cancer burden in Great Britain.

A sound knowledge base is required to target resources to reduce workplace exposure to carcinogens. This project aimed to provide an objective estimate of the burden of cancer in Britain due to occupation. This volume presents extensive analyses for all carcinogens and occupational circumstances defined as definite or probable human occupational carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. This article outlines the structure of the supplement - two methodological papers (statistical approach and exposure assessment), eight papers presenting the cancer-specific results grouped by broad anatomical site, a paper giving industry sector results and one discussing work-related cancer-prevention strategies. A brief summary of the methods and an overview of the updated overall results are given in this introductory paper. A general discussion of the overall strengths and limitations of the study is also presented. Overall, 8010 (5.3%) total cancer deaths in Britain and 13,598 cancer registrations were attributable to occupation in 2005 and 2004, respectively. The importance of cancer sites such as mesothelioma, sinonasal, lung, nasopharynx, breast, non-melanoma skin cancer, bladder, oesophagus, soft tissue sarcoma and stomach cancers are highlighted, as are carcinogens such as asbestos, mineral oils, solar radiation, silica, diesel engine exhaust, coal tars and pitches, dioxins, environmental tobacco smoke, radon, tetrachloroethylene, arsenic and strong inorganic mists, as well as occupational circumstances such as shift work and occupation as a painter or welder. The methods developed for this project are being adapted by other countries and extended to include social and economic impact evaluation.

Cancers in France in 2015 attributable to occupational exposures.

BACKGROUND: Recent and comprehensive estimates for the number of new cancer cases in France attributable to occupational exposures are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the number of new cancer cases attributable to occupational exposures, using a newly developed methodology and the most recent data, for a comprehensive set of occupational carcinogens in France in 2015. METHODS: Surveys among employees, the national labor force data, a cohort of agricultural workers, national monitoring of workers exposed to ionizing radiation and job-exposure matrix in France were used. The number and proportion of new cancer cases attributable to established occupational carcinogens (Group 1) was estimated using estimation of lifetime exposure and risk estimates from cohort studies. Cancer data were obtained from the French Cancer Registries Network. RESULTS: In France in 2015, an estimated 7905 new cancer cases, 7336 among men and 569 among women, were attributable to occupational exposures, representing 2.3% of all new cancer cases (3.9% and 0.4% among men and women respectively). Among men and women, lung cancer was impacted the most, followed by mesothelioma and bladder cancer in men, and by mesothelioma and ovary in women. These cancers contributed to 89% of the total cancers attributable to occupational carcinogens in men, and to 80% in women. The main contributing occupational agent was asbestos among men (45%) and women (60%). CONCLUSIONS: Currently, occupational exposures contribute to a substantial burden of cancer in France. Enhanced monitoring and implementation of protective labor policies could potentially prevent a large proportion of these cancers.

The future excess fraction of occupational cancer among those exposed to carcinogens at work in Australia in 2012.

BACKGROUND: Studies in other countries have generally found approximately 4% of current cancers to be attributable to past occupational exposures. This study aimed to estimate the future burden of cancer resulting from current occupational exposures in Australia. METHODS: The future excess fraction method was used to estimate the future burden of occupational cancer (2012-2094) among the proportion of the Australian working population who were exposed to occupational carcinogens in 2012. Calculations were conducted for 19 cancer types and 53 cancer-exposure pairings, assuming historical trends and current patterns continued to 2094. RESULTS: The cohort of 14.6 million Australians of working age in 2012 will develop an estimated 4.8 million cancers during their lifetime, of which 68,500 (1.4%) are attributable to occupational exposure in those exposed in 2012. The majority of these will be lung cancers (n=26,000), leukaemias (n=8000), and malignant mesotheliomas (n=7500). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of future cancers will result from occupational exposures. This estimate is lower than previous estimates in the literature; however, our estimate is not directly comparable to past estimates of the occupational cancer burden because they describe different quantities - future cancers in currently exposed versus current cancers due to past exposures. The results of this study allow us to determine which current occupational exposures are most important, and where to target exposure prevention.

The proportion of cancer attributable to occupational exposures.

PURPOSE: To review the literature on the estimation of the population attributable fraction (PAF) of cancer due to occupational exposures and to describe challenges in the estimation of this metric. To help illustrate the inherent challenges, we also estimate PAFs for selected cancers diagnosed in the United States in 2010 attributable to work as a painter (causally associated with bladder and lung cancer) and shift work (possibly associated with breast cancer). METHODS: We reviewed and summarized previous reports providing quantitative estimates of PAF for total cancer due to occupational exposures. We calculated PAF estimates for painters and shift work using methodology from a detailed investigation of the occupational cancer burden in Great Britain, with adaptations made for the US population. RESULTS: The estimated occupation-attributable fraction for total cancer generally ranged between 2% and 8% (men, 3%-14%; women, 1%-2%) based on previous reports. We calculated that employment as a painter accounted for a very small proportion of cancers of the bladder and lung diagnosed in the United States in 2010, with PAFs of 0.5% for each site. In contrast, our calculations suggest that the potential impact of shift work on breast cancer (if causal) could be substantial, with a PAF of 5.7%, translating to 11,777 attributable breast cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Continued efforts to estimate the occupational cancer burden will be important as scientific evidence and economic trends evolve. Such projects should consider the challenges involved in PAF estimation, which we summarize in this report.