Occupational exposure to arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and nickel, and renal cell carcinoma: a case–control study from Central and Eastern Europe. Issue 10 (8th January 2011)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Boffetta, Paolo; Fontana, Luc; Stewart, Patricia; Zaridze, David; Szeszenia-Dabrowska, Neonilia; Janout, Vladimir; Bencko, Vladimir; Foretova, Lenka; Jinga, Viorel; Matveev, Vsevolod; Kollarova, Helena; Ferro, Gilles; Chow, Wong-Ho; Rothman, Nathaniel; van Bemmel, Dana; Karami, Sara; Brennan, Paul; Moore, Lee E
• Is Part Of: Occupational and environmental medicine. Volume 68:Issue 10(2011)
• Page Start: 723
• Page End: 728
• Publication Date: 2011-01-08
• Subjects: Arsenic -- cadmium -- chromium -- kidney cancer -- lead -- nickel -- occupation -- renal cell carcinoma -- epidemiology -- cancer -- metals; Medicine, Industrial -- Periodicals; Environmental health -- Periodicals; 616.980305
• DOI: 10.1136/oem.2010.056341
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1351-0711

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: To investigate the risk of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in Central and Eastern Europe in relation to exposure to known and suspected carcinogenic metals. Methods: During 1999–2003, the authors conducted a hospital-based study in Czech Republic, Poland, Romania and Russia, including 1097 cases of RCC and 1476 controls. Occupational exposure to arsenic, cadmium, chromium(III), chromium(VI), lead and nickel was assessed by teams of local industrial hygiene experts, based on detailed occupational questionnaires. Results: The ORs for RCC were 1.55 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.21) for exposure to lead and 1.40 (95% CI 0.69 to 2.85) for exposure to cadmium. No clear monotonic exposure–response relation was apparent for either duration of exposure or cumulative exposure to either metal, although the OR for the highest category of cumulative exposure to lead was 2.25 (95% CI 1.21 to 4.19). Exposure to other metals did not entail an increased risk of RCC. Conclusions: For cadmium, the lack of statistical significance of most results, potential confounding and the absence of clear dose–response relations suggest that an association with RCC is unlikely to be causal. In the case of lead, however, the elevated risk in the category of highest cumulative exposure is noteworthy and justifies further investigation.