The Impact of Occupational Exposures on the Risk of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT

Rationale Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive fibrotic pulmonary disorder of unknown etiology that is characterized by a usual interstitial pneumonia pattern. Previous meta-analyses have reported associations between occupational exposures and IPF, but higher-quality studies have been published in recent years, doubling the number of studied patients. Objectives: To provide a contemporary and comprehensive assessment of the relationship between occupational exposures and IPF. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science through July 2023 to identify all publications on occupational exposure and IPF. We conducted a meta-analysis of the occupational burden, odds ratio (OR), and population attributable fraction (PAF) of exposures. Five exposure categories were analyzed vapors, gas, dust, and fumes (VGDF); metal dust; wood dust; silica dust; and agricultural dust. A comprehensive bias assessment was performed. The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier CRD42021267808). Results: Our search identified 23,942 publications. Sixteen publications contained relative risks needed to calculate pooled ORs and PAFs, and 12 additional publications reported an occupational burden within a case series. The proportion of cases with occupational exposures to VGDF was 44% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36-53%), with a range of 8-17% within more specific exposure categories. The pooled OR was increased for VGDF at 1.8 (95% CI, 1.3-2.4), with a pooled PAF of 21% (95% CI, 15-28%). ORs and PAFs, respectively, were found to be 1.6 and 7% for metal dust, 1.6 and 3% for wood dust, 1.8 and 14% for agricultural dust, and 1.8 and 4% for silica dust. The pooled ORs and PAFs within specific exposure categories ranged from 1.6 to 1.8 and from 4% to 14%, respectively. We identified some publication bias, but it was not sufficient to diminish the association between occupational exposures and IPF based on sensitivity analysis and bias assessment. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that 21% of IPF cases (or approximately one in five) could be prevented by removal of occupational exposure (alongside a pooled OR of 1.8). Additionally, 44% of patients with IPF report occupational exposure to VGDF. This meta-analysis suggests that a considerable number of cases of IPF are attributable to inhaled occupational exposures and warrant increased consideration in the clinical care of patients and future prevention efforts.