4.6 Article

Upper Airway Cancer, Myeloid Leukemia, and Other Cancers in a Cohort of British Chemical Workers Exposed to Formaldehyde

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 179, 期 11, 页码 1301-1311

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwu049

关键词

cancer; chemical industry; formaldehyde; mortality; myeloid leukemia; nasopharyngeal cancer; occupational exposure

资金

  1. Colt Foundation [CF/03/10]
  2. MRC [MC_UP_A620_1018, MC_UU_12011/5] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_UP_A620_1018, MC_UU_12011/5] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The International Agency for Research on Cancer controversially has classified formaldehyde as causing nasopharyngeal carcinoma and myeloid leukemia. To provide further information on this question, we extended follow-up of a cohort of 14,008 chemical workers at 6 factories in England and Wales, covering the period 1941-2012. Mortality was compared with national death rates for England and Wales, and associations with incident upper airway cancer and leukemia were explored in nested case-control analyses. We observed excess deaths from cancers of the esophagus (100 observed vs. 93.1 expected), stomach (182 vs. 141.4), rectum (107 vs. 86.8), liver (35 vs. 26.9), and lung (813 vs. 645.8), but none of these tumors exhibited a clear exposure-response relationship. Nested case-control analyses of 115 men with upper airway cancer (including 1 nasopharyngeal cancer), 92 men with leukemia, and 45 men with myeloid leukemia indicated no elevations of risk in the highest exposure category (high exposure for a parts per thousand yen1 year). When the 2 highest exposure categories were combined, the odds ratio for myeloid leukemia was 1.26 (95% confidence interval: 0.39, 4.08). Our results provide no support for an increased hazard of myeloid leukemia, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, or other upper airway tumors from formaldehyde exposure. These results indicate that any excess risk of these cancers, even from relatively high exposures, is at most small.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据