Article

Mortality from cancer and other causes among airline cabin attendants in Europe: a collaborative cohort study in eight countries.

Division of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, School of Public Health, University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany.
American Journal of Epidemiology (Impact Factor: 4.98). 08/2003; 158(1):35-46.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There is concern about the health effects of exposure to cosmic radiation during air travel. To study the potential health effects of this and occupational exposures, the authors investigated mortality patterns among more than 44,000 airline cabin crew members in Europe. A cohort study was performed in eight European countries, yielding approximately 655,000 person-years of follow-up. Observed numbers of deaths were compared with expected numbers based on national mortality rates. Among female cabin crew, overall mortality (standardized mortality ratio (SMR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.73, 0.88) and all-cancer mortality (SMR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.66, 0.95) were slightly reduced, while breast cancer mortality was slightly but nonsignificantly increased (SMR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.48). In contrast, overall mortality (SMR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.18) and mortality from skin cancer (for malignant melanoma, SMR = 1.93, 95% CI: 0.70, 4.44) among male cabin crew were somewhat increased. The authors noted excess mortality from aircraft accidents and from acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in males. Among airline cabin crew in Europe, there was no increase in mortality that could be attributed to cosmic radiation or other occupational exposures to any substantial extent. The risk of skin cancer among male crew members requires further attention.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Anette Linnersjö, Jul 07, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
149 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many individuals are, or have been, exposed to ionising radiation in the course of their work and the epidemiological study of occupationally irradiated groups offers an important opportunity to complement the estimates of risks to health resulting from exposure to radiation that are obtained from other populations, such as the Japanese survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Moreover, workplace exposure to radiation usually involves irradiation conditions that are of direct relevance to the principal concern of radiological protection: protracted exposure to low level radiation. Further, some workers have been exposed to radioactive material that has been inadvertently taken into the body, and the study of these groups leads to risk estimates derived directly from the experience of those irradiated by these 'internal emitters', intakes of alpha-particle-emitters being of particular interest. Workforces that have been the subject of epidemiological study include medical staff, aircrews, radium dial luminisers, underground hard-rock miners, Chernobyl clean-up workers, nuclear weapons test participants and nuclear industry workers. The first solid epidemiological evidence of the stochastic effects of irradiation came from a study of occupational exposure to medical x-rays that was reported in 1944, which demonstrated a large excess risk of leukaemia among US radiologists; but the general lack of dose records for early medical staff who tended to experience the highest exposures hampers the derivation of risks per unit dose received by medical workers. The instrument dial luminisers who inadvertently ingested large amounts of radium-based paint and underground hard-rock miners who inhaled large quantities of radon and its decay products suffered markedly raised excess risks of, respectively, bone and lung cancers; the miner studies have provided standard risk estimates for radon-induced lung cancer. The large numbers of nuclear industry workers around the world present a possibility of deriving risk coefficients of direct relevance to radiological protection, and the recently published study of workers from 15 countries illustrates what can be achieved by international collaboration. However, it would appear that there are some problems with this study that require attention before reliance can be placed upon the results. Early workers from the Mayak plutonium production facility in Russia were heavily exposed to external sources of penetrating radiation and to plutonium, and appreciable effort has been expended in obtaining dependable risk estimates from this scientifically valuable group of workers. Those occupationally exposed to low levels of radiation also present an opportunity of studying possible somatic health effects other than cancer, such as heart disease and eye cataracts, that are the subject of much discussion at present. Overall, studies of exposure to ionising radiation in the workplace provide a valuable support to studies of those groups exposed under other circumstances, and in some instances (such as exposure to plutonium) effectively offer the only direct source of epidemiological evidence on risks.
    Journal of Radiological Protection 07/2009; 29(2A):A61-79. DOI:10.1088/0952-4746/29/2A/S05 · 1.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The ICRP and the BEIR VII reports recommend a linear no threshold (LNT) relationship for the estimation of cancer excess risk induced by ionising radiations (IR), but the 2005 report of Medicine and Science French Academies concludes that it leads to overestimate of risk for low and very low doses. The bases of LNT are challenged by recent biological and animal experimental studies which show that the defence against IR involves the cell microenvironment and the immunologic system. The defence mechanisms against low doses are different and comparatively more effective than for high doses. Cell death is predominant against low doses. DNA repairing is activated against high doses, in order to preserve tissue functions. These mechanisms provide for multicellular organisms an effective and low cost defence system. The differences between low and high doses defence mechanisms are obvious for alpha emitters which show several greys threshold effects. These differences result in an impairment of epidemiological studies which, for statistical power purpose, amalgamate high and low doses exposure data, since it would imply that cancer IR induction and defence mechanisms are similar in both cases. Low IR dose risk estimates should rely on specific epidemiological studies restricted to low dose exposures and taking precisely into account potential confounding factors. The preliminary synthesis of cohort studies for which low dose data (< 100 mSv) were available show no significant risk excess, neither for solid cancer nor for leukemias. Si la publication 99 de la CIPR et le BEIR VII recommandent de maintenir l’usage d’une relation linéaire sans seuil (RLSS) pour estimer l’excès de risque relatif de cancer lié à de faibles doses de rayonnements ionisants (RI), le rapport conjoint de l’Académie des sciences et de l’Académie de médecine (2005) conclut qu’elle conduit à une forte surestimation des risques des faibles et des très faibles doses. Les fondements de la RLSS sont remis en question par de nouvelles données biologiques et de l’expérimentation animale qui montrent que la défense contre les RI met en jeu le micro-environnement cellulaire et le système immunitaire, et que les mécanismes de défense contre les faibles doses de RI sont différents et plus efficaces. Ces cellules lésées par une irradiation à faible dose sont éliminées ; la réparation s’impose à forte dose pour préserver les fonctions tissulaires. Les organismes pluricellulaires réalisent ainsi une défense au moindre coût et au moindre risque contre les RI et les dégâts du métabolisme oxydatif. Les différences entre les défenses contre les faibles et fortes doses sont particulièrement nettes dans le cas de contamination par des émetteurs alpha qui montrent chez l’homme et l’animal des effets à seuil de plusieurs grays. Ces différences remettent en question les résultats des études épidémiologiques qui, pour des raisons de puissance statistique, estiment les risques en fusionnant des données obtenues pour des gammes de doses très étendues, ce qui sous entend implicitement que les mécanismes de cancérogenèse sont similaires quelle que soit la dose. L’estimation des risques des faibles doses de RI doit reposer sur des études spécifiquement limitées aux faibles doses, avec une évaluation précise de facteurs de confusion potentiels. La synthèse des études de cohorte pour lesquelles on dispose des coefficients de risque fondés sur les seules doses inférieures à 100 mSv chez l’adulte ne montre pas d’excès de risque relatif significatif, ni pour les tumeurs solides ni pour les leucémies.
    Radioprotection 04/2007; DOI:10.1051/radiopro:2007007 · 0.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Evidence of the association between leukemia and benzene exposure has been provided by several epidemiological studies. An increased risk of breast cancer among women exposed to benzene has also been suggested. The aim of this study was to analyze breast cancer risk in a cohort of 1,002 women exposed to benzene in a shoe factory in Florence, Italy, where an excess of leukemia in men was reported. The cohort of women at work on January 1st, 1950, was followed from 1950 to 2003 for mortality and from 1985 to 2000 for incidence of breast cancer. For a sub-cohort of 797 women, cumulative exposure to benzene was available. Standardized mortality ratios were obtained for the 797 women for whom information on cumulative exposure was available. For those with < 30 years of latency the standardized mortality ratio was 58.5 (95% CI, 18.9-181.2, based on 3 deaths) and 151.1 (95% CI, 78.6-290.3, based on 9 deaths) for > or = 30 years of latency. In the > 40 ppm-year and > or = 30 year latency period category, the standardized mortality ratio was 166.0 (95% CI, 62.3-442.2, based on 4 deaths). The standardized incidence ratio for women with a latency period < 30 years was 140.9 (95% CI, 75.8-261.9, based on 10 cases) and 108.2 (95% CI, 64.1-182.7) for a latency period > or = 30 years. For cumulative exposure > 40 ppm-years and a latency period < 30 years, the standardized incidence ratio was 211.9 (95% CI, 29.9-1504.1, based on 1 case). The study moderately supports the hypothesis that benzene represents a risk factor for breast cancer.
    Tumori 95(1):8-12. · 1.09 Impact Factor