Occupational Risk Factors for Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis
10.15430/JCP.2019.24.2.91
- Author:
Srmena KRSTEV
1
;
Anders KNUTSSON
Author Information
1. Serbian Institute of Occupational Health, Belgrade, Serbia. srmena.krstev@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Meta-Analysis
- Keywords:
Epidemiologic studies;
Work-place factors;
Exposure assessment;
Causal association;
Literature search
- MeSH:
Acrylonitrile;
Cadmium;
Carbamates;
Chromium;
Cohort Studies;
Epidemiologic Studies;
Humans;
Male;
Motor Activity;
Occupational Exposure;
Pesticides;
Population Characteristics;
Prostate;
Prostatic Neoplasms;
Radiation, Ionizing;
Risk Factors;
Rubber;
Triazines;
Vibration
- From:Journal of Cancer Prevention
2019;24(2):91-111
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men worldwide. There are many occupational factors that have been suggested to cause prostate cancer. Our aim was to evaluate the evidence for causality by a literature review of occupational factors. We searched literature in Medline and SCOPUS from 1966 to June 30, 2015 to identify occupational risk factors for prostate cancer. The following risk factors were selected: farmers/agricultural workers, pesticides – whole group, and separately organophosphate and organochlorine pesticides, carbamates and triazines, cadmium, chromium, cutting fluids, acrylonitrile, rubber manufacturing, whole body vibration, shift work, flight personnel, ionizing radiation, and occupational physical activity. For each factor a literature search was performed and presented as meta-analysis of relative risk and heterogeneity (Q and I² index). A total of 168 original studies met the inclusion criteria with 90,688 prostate cancer cases. Significantly increased risks were observed for the following occupational exposures: pesticides (metaRR = 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01–1.32; I² = 84%), and specifically group of organochlorine pesticides (meta relative risk [metaRR] = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.03–1.14; I² = 0%), chromium (metaRR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.07–1.34; I² = 31%), shift work (metaRR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.05–1.49; I² = 78%) and pilots (metaRR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.02–1.94; I² = 63%) and occupational physical activity in cohort studies (metaRR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.81–0.94; I² = 0%). The literature review supports a causal association for a few of the previously suggested factors.
