You are here

An examination of the association between lifetime history of prostate and pancreatic cancer diagnosis and occupation in a population sample of Canadians

TitleAn examination of the association between lifetime history of prostate and pancreatic cancer diagnosis and occupation in a population sample of Canadians
Year of Publication2020
AuthorsSingh, S., McDonald J. Ted, Ilie G., and Adisesh A.
JournalPLOS One
Volume15
Pages1 - 17
Keywordscancer detection and diagnosis, cancer risk factors, death rates, educational attainment, pancreatic cancer, professions, prostate cancer, prostate gland
Abstract

Background Occupation was assessed as possible risk factors for prostate (PCa) and pancreatic cancer in a large Canadian worker cohort. Methods The Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC) was derived from linking the 1991 Canadian Census Cohort to the Canadian Cancer Database (1969-2010), Canadian Mortality Database (1991-2011), and Tax Summary Files (1981-2011). From the total sample of 1,931,110 persons, we identified and derived two samples of 28,610 men and 3,220 men and women with a past history of PCa and pancreatic cancer diagnoses, respectively. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazards ratios and 95% confidence intervals for occupation. Results In Canadian men aged 24-64 years, the highest elevated risks of PCa were observed for library clerks (HR = 2.36, 95% CI:1.12-4.97), medical radiation technologists (HR = 1.66, 95% CI:1.04-2.65), telecommunications and line cable workers (HR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.22-3.16) and commissioned police officers (HR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.10-2.16. The highest elevated risk for pancreatic cancer were observed for commissioned police officers (HR = 4.34, 95% CI: 1.85-10.21), photographic and film processors (HR = 3.97, 95% CI:1.69-9.34), railway and motor transport labourers (HR = 3.94, 95% CI: 1.67-9.29), and computer engineers (HR = 3.82, 95%CI: 1.52-9.61). Conclusion These findings emphasize the need for further study of job-related exposures and the potential influence of non-occupational factors such as screening practices.

URLhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227622
DOI10.1371/journal.pone.0227622
Document URLhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227622&type=printable