RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Heat exposures occur in many occupations. Heat has been linked to key carcinogenic processes, however, evidence for associations with cancer risk is sparse. We examined potential associations between occupational heat exposure and prostate cancer risk in a multi-country study. METHODS: We analysed a large, pooled dataset of 3142 histologically confirmed prostate cancer cases and 3512 frequency-matched controls from three countries: Canada, France, and Spain. Three exposure indices: ever exposure, lifetime cumulative exposure and duration of exposure, were developed using the Finnish Job-Exposure Matrix, FINJEM, applied to the lifetime occupational history of participants. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using conditional logistic regression models stratified by 5-year age groups and study, adjusting for potential confounders. Potential interactions with exposure to other occupational agents were also explored. RESULTS: Overall, we found no association for ever occupational heat exposure (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.87, 1.09), nor in the highest categories of lifetime cumulative exposure (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.89, 1.23) or duration (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.88, 1.22). When using only the Spanish case-control study and a Spanish Job Exposure Matrix (JEM), some weakly elevated ORs were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study provide no clear evidence for an association between occupational heat exposure and prostate cancer risk.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Profesionales , Exposición Profesional , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Calor , Modelos Logísticos , Enfermedades Profesionales/inducido químicamente , Enfermedades Profesionales/epidemiología , Exposición Profesional/efectos adversos , Exposición Profesional/análisis , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/etiología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although prostate cancer (PCa) is the most frequent male cancer in industrialized countries, little is known about its aetiology. The literature has suggested an influence of the environment, including occupational exposures, but results are inconsistent. In this context, we investigated PCa risk associated to employment among several occupations using data from EPICAP study. METHODS: EPICAP is a French population-based case-control study including 819 PCa incident cases and 879 controls frequency-matched on age. In-person interviews gathered data on potential risk factors and lifetime occupational histories for each job held at least 6 months. Then, occupations were coded using ISCO 68. Unconditional logistic regressions were performed to assess the association between occupations (ever occupied and by duration) and PCa risk, whether all and aggressive, after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: For ≥10 years of employment, we found positive associations with PCa, whether overall and aggressive, among Medical, Dental and Veterinary workers (OR (odds ratios) =5.01 [95% confidence interval] [1.27; 19.77]), Members of the armed forces (OR = 5.14 [0.99; 26.71]) and Fishermen, hunters and related workers (OR = 4.58 [1.33; 15.78]); whether overall and non-aggressive PCa, among Legislative officials and Government administrators (OR = 3.30 [1.10; 9.84]) or Managers (OR = 1.68 [1.18; 2.41]); however a negative association, whether overall and non-aggressive PCa, among Material-Handling and Related Equipment Operators, Dockers and Freight Handlers (OR = 0.40 [0.17; 0.97]). CONCLUSION: Excess PCa risks were observed in the EPICAP study mostly among white collar workers exposed to several factors in their work environment. These emerging associations can be used to lead future research investigating specific occupational exposures.