miun.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Occupational Risk Factors for Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
Serbian Inst Occupat Hlth, Belgrade, Serbia.
Mid Sweden University, Faculty of Human Sciences, Department of Health Sciences.
2019 (English)In: Journal Of Cancer Prevention, ISSN 2288-3649, Vol. 24, no 2, p. 91-111Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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 I-2 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; I-2 = 84%), and specifically group of organochlorine pesticides (meta relative risk [metaRR] = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.03-1.14; I-2 = 0%), chromium (metaRR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.07-1.34; I-2 = 31%), shift work (metaRR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.05-1.49; I-2 = 78%) and pilots (metaRR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.02-1.94; I-2 = 63%) and occupational physical activity in cohort studies (metaRR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.81-0.94; I-2 = 0%). The literature review supports a causal association for a few of the previously suggested factors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 24, no 2, p. 91-111
Keywords [en]
Epidemiologic studies, Work-place factors, Exposure assessment, Causal association, Literature search
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:miun:diva-36820DOI: 10.15430/JCP.2019.24.2.91ISI: 000477679600004PubMedID: 31360689OAI: oai:DiVA.org:miun-36820DiVA, id: diva2:1341844
Available from: 2019-08-12 Created: 2019-08-12 Last updated: 2019-08-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Knutsson, Anders

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Knutsson, Anders
By organisation
Department of Health Sciences
Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf