Occupational exposure and thoracic malignancies, is there a relationship?

Our plain-English summary of Occupational exposure and thoracic malignancies, is there a relationship?, by S. Baser, O. Duzce, F. Evyapan, et al (Journal of Occupational Health, 2013).

The study

• Authors: S. Baser, O. Duzce, F. Evyapan, B. Akdag, S. Ozkurt, G. Kiter
• Journal: Journal of Occupational Health
• Published: 2013;55(4):301-6
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of occupational exposure in the occurrence of lung cancer.

Method: Three-hundred lung cancer cases diagnosed between September 1, 1999, and September 31, 2007, and 300 healthy controls were enrolled in this case-control study. Life-long occupational history, gender, age, exposure to asbestos, comorbidities, and smoking status were collected.

Results: The mean age of the 300 lung cancer cases was 60.3 ± 9.9 year (91.7% male and 8.3% female), and the mean age of healthy control group was 60.4 ± 10.5 year (95.0% male and 5.0% female). The most frequent histological types were squamous (172, 57.3%), adeno (69, 23.1%), and small cell (37, 12.3%). There was an increased risk of lung cancer occurrence among agriculture workers (OR=1.89, 95% Cl=1.17-2.98) (p=0.009). Inorganic dust exposure (OR=1.81, 95% Cl=1.0-3.25) (p=0.049) and organic dust exposure (OR=1.89, 95% Cl=1.0-3.59) (p=0.05) were found to be related with high frequency of having lung cancer.

Conclusion: Workers who had occupational exposure to organic and inorganic dust, especially in the agricultural field, had higher risk of lung cancer occurrence when compared with office workers.

In plain English

This case-control study, from Pamukkale University Medical Faculty in Turkey, compared 300 people with lung cancer diagnosed between September 1999 and September 2007 with 300 healthy controls. The controls were relatives who came to the hospital with other patients. A face-to-face questionnaire recorded lifelong job history, workplace exposures, asbestos exposure and smoking. The cancer cases included 10 mesotheliomas. People were grouped by job and exposure type and compared with office workers. Agricultural workers had an odds ratio of 1.89 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.98). Workers exposed to inorganic dust (ceramic, pottery, construction, mining and quarrying) had 1.81 (1.00 to 3.25). Workers exposed to organic dust (textile, bakery, sugar and sweet production) had 1.89 (1.00 to 3.59). Irritant-exposed workers showed no significant difference. Reported asbestos exposure was similar in cases (58.3%) and controls (60.7%), with no fiber type given. Fewer cases than controls had never smoked. The authors concluded that dust-exposed workers, especially in agriculture, had higher lung cancer risk than office workers. They found no link between occupation and cancer cell type, adding that small patient numbers may preclude definitive conclusions on this.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Hospital-based case-control study using a person-to-person structured questionnaire
• Who was studied: 300 lung cancer cases (275 male, 25 female; mean age 60.3) diagnosed between September 1999 and September 2007, and 300 disease-free controls (285 male, 15 female; mean age 60.4). Controls were relatives accompanying other patients. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Pamukkale University Medical Faculty, Turkey.
• Exposure: Self-reported occupational history and exposures, grouped as: agriculture workers and farmers; inorganic dust (ceramic and pottery, construction, mining and quarrying workers); organic dust (textile workers, bakers, sugar and sweet production workers); irritants (electrical and electronics assemblers, rubber and plastics makers, iron and steel foundry workers, house cleaners, painters, drivers); and office workers with no exposure as the reference group. Asbestos exposure, pesticide use and smoking were also recorded. No asbestos fiber type was specified.
• Main results:
  • Agricultural workers (80 cases, 26.7%; 55 controls, 18.3%) compared with office workers: OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.98, p=0.009.
  • Inorganic dust exposure group (38 cases, 12.7%; 27 controls, 9.0%): OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.25, p=0.049.
  • Organic dust exposure group (31 cases, 10.3%; 21 controls, 7.0%): OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.59, p=0.05.
  • Irritant exposure group (84 cases, 28%; 111 controls, 37.0%): OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.49, not significant.
  • Reported asbestos exposure was 175 of 300 cases (58.3%) and 182 of 300 controls (60.7%), not significantly different.
  • Never-smokers: 38 cases (12.7%) and 89 controls (printed as 29.1%). Smoking status differed between groups, p=0.001.
  • Mean pesticide use was 0.73 plus or minus 1.37 times per year in cases and 0.44 plus or minus 1.01 times per year in controls. The authors reported this as significantly higher in cases (p less than 0.01).
  • Histological types among cases included 10 mesotheliomas (3.3%), along with squamous (172), adeno (69), small cell (37) and large cell (5).
  • No relationship was found between histological type of cancer and occupation (p greater than 0.05).
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that workers occupationally exposed to organic and inorganic dust, especially in agriculture, had a higher risk of lung cancer than office workers.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors found no relationship between histological type and occupation. Right after that finding, they stated that their small patient numbers may preclude definitive conclusions.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Occupational Exposure, Lung Cancer, Case-Control Study, Occupational History.

Related studies

• COVID-19 in patients with thoracic malignancies (TERAVOLT): first results of an international, registry-based, cohort study — M.C. Garassino, J.G. Whisenant, et al. (2020)
• Thirty-day mortality underestimates the risk of early death after major resections for thoracic malignancies — R.R. McMillan, A. Berger, et al. (2014)
• Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-Cell Therapy for Thoracic Malignancies — S. Kiesgen, L. Chicaybam, et al. (2018)
• Progress in the Management of Advanced Thoracic Malignancies in 2017 — R. Ferrara, L. Mezquita, et al. (2018)
• I-O Optimise: a novel multinational real-world research platform in thoracic malignancies — S. Ekman, F. Griesinger, et al. (2019)
• Eighth Edition Staging of Thoracic Malignancies: Implications for the Reporting Pathologist — A.G. Nicholson, M.S. Tsao, et al. (2018)

Browse more research in Journal of Occupational Health, or return to medical research.