Occupational cancer among women: research status and methodologic considerations.

National Cancer Institute, Occupational Epidemiology Branch, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.97). 08/1999; 36(1):6-17. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199907)36:1<6::AID-AJIM2>3.0.CO;2-F
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Occupational causes of cancer have not been well-evaluated among women. An increase in the number of women in the work force in jobs with potentially hazardous exposures during the past few decades raises the question as to whether there is a need to enhance our efforts in this area. The inability to evaluate occupational causes of female gynecologic tumors in studies of men, plus the potential for variation in outcome responses between men and women because of gender-based exposure and susceptibility differences, underscore the need for investigations specifically focused on women. Investigations of occupational exposures and cancer risk among women may require design considerations that differ somewhat from studies of men. Issues to consider include the impact of studying outcomes with high survival (e.g., breast cancer), gender-specific exposure patterns and toxicokinetic processing of some chemicals, special limitations in the use of the general population as the referent, and the need to control for established risk factors for gynecologic tumors.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The impact of crocidolite exposure on the health of former Wittenoom miners and millers (largely male) has been well documented. Less is known about the health outcomes of the 2,968 women and girls who lived (N = 2,552) and worked (N = 416) in the blue asbestos milling and mining town of Wittenoom between 1943 and 1992. Quantitative exposure measurements were derived from dust studies undertaken over the lifetime of the mine and mill and the township. Incident cancers were obtained from the Western Australian (WA) Cancer Registry and the National Cancer Clearing House. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRS) compared Wittenoom females with the WA female population. Exposure-response relationships were examined using a matched case-control study design. There were (47) mesothelioma and (55) lung cancer cases among the 437 cancers in the Wittenoom females over the period 1960-2005. When compared to the WA female population, Wittenoom women and girls had higher rates of mesothelioma and possibly lung cancer. Mesothelioma incidence rates are increasing with the incidence rate of 193 per 100,000 in the period 2000-2005 being more than double that for the period 1995-1999 at 84 per 100,000. A significant exposure-response relationship was present for mesothelioma, but not for lung cancer. Forty years after the asbestos mine and mill at Wittenoom were closed, there is a high toll from cancer among the former female residents of the town and company workers.
    International Journal of Cancer 06/2008; 122(10):2337-44. · 6.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To support health research on the unique cohort of women with a history of military service, this study assessed the completeness of mortality ascertainment for Texas women veterans in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-VA databases. We examined female veteran-specific mortality ascertainment comparing the VA Beneficiary Identification and Records Locator Subsystem Death File (BIRLS DF), VA Patient Treatment Files (PTF), and Social Security Administration-Death Master File (SSA-DMF) with Texas death certificate data. Databases were deterministically cross-linked, using female sex and social security numbers. Deterministic and probabilistic linkage methods were also compared. Of 6,297 decedents identified by death certificates, SSA-DMF, BIRLS DF, and PTF databases identified 97.5% collectively and 94%, 77%, and 5% individually. Compared with Texas death certificates, sensitivity of VA and SSA databases improved with increasing age. This study highlights that although the VA and SSA administrative databases have less complete ascertainment for younger decedents, combined these electronic databases provide nearly complete ascertainment for women veterans. Challenges related to large female-specific cross-linkage studies are explored, and a need to examine methods for female-specific health research studies in the general population is identified.
    Medical care 02/2009; 47(1):125-8. · 3.24 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Occupational cancers are highly preventable. This communication summarizes the data on occupational carcinogenic hazards, highlighting important worker groups and prevention. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified 29 agents that may occur at work in Group 1 (carcinogenic in humans); 26 in Group 2A (probably carcinogenic); and 113 in Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic). Frequent occupational carcinogens in Central America include solar (Group 1) and ultraviolet (2A) radiation, diesel emissions (2A), polyaromatic hydrocarbons (1-3), environmental tobacco smoke (1), hexavalent chromium compounds (1) and benzene (1). Regarding women, studies on breast and ovarian cancer suggest associations with occupational exposures. The data on carcinogenic risks in the informal economy are scanty. Carcinogenic agents that may be present occur in agriculture include solar radiation, aflatoxins, diesel emissions, viruses, dusts, solvents and pesticides. Carcinogenic agents in the health sector include ethylene oxide; formaldehyde; environmental tobacco smoke; tri- and tetrachloroethylene; benzene; asbestos; carcinogenic drugs, hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, viruses and waste materials; and carcinogenic gases. Environmental exposures during development and infancy may cause childhood cancer. Prevention of health risks at the workplace is the responsibility of the employer. The principle of precaution, due to sparse, plausible and credible evidence about probable danger and the establishment of safety and health committees are recommended.
    Acta médica costarricense 12/2009; 51(4):195-205.