Brouwer Maartje, Schinasi Leah, Beane Freeman Laura E, Baldi Isabelle, Lebailly Pierre, Ferro Gilles, Nordby Karl-Christian, Schüz Joachim, Leon Maria E, Kromhout Hans
Division of Environmental Epidemiology, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Section of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Occup Environ Med. 2016 Jun;73(6):359-67. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2015-103319. Epub 2016 Mar 23.
This paper describes methods developed to assess occupational exposure to pesticide active ingredients and chemical groups, harmonised across cohort studies included in the first AGRICOH pooling project, focused on the risk of lymph-haematological malignancies.
Three prospective agricultural cohort studies were included: US Agricultural Health Study (AHS), French Agriculture and Cancer Study (AGRICAN) and Cancer in the Norwegian Agricultural Population (CNAP). Self-reported pesticide use was collected in AHS. Crop-exposure matrices (CEMs) were developed for AGRICAN and CNAP. We explored the potential impact of these differences in exposure assessment by comparing a CEM approach estimating exposure in AHS with self-reported pesticide use.
In AHS, 99% of participants were considered exposed to pesticides, 68% in AGRICAN and 63% in CNAP. For all cohorts combined (n=316 270), prevalence of exposure ranged from 19% to 59% for 14 chemical groups examined, and from 13% to 46% for 33 active ingredients. Exposures were highly correlated within AGRICAN and CNAP where CEMs were applied; they were less correlated in AHS. Poor agreement was found between self-reported pesticide use and assigned exposure in AHS using a CEM approach resembling the assessment for AGRICAN (κ -0.00 to 0.33) and CNAP (κ -0.01 to 0.14).
We developed country-specific CEMs to assign occupational exposure to pesticides in cohorts lacking self-reported data on the use of specific pesticides. The different exposure assessment methods applied may overestimate or underestimate actual exposure prevalence, and additional work is needed to better estimate how far the exposure estimates deviate from reality.
本文介绍了为评估农药活性成分和化学组的职业暴露而开发的方法,这些方法在首个农业职业队列综合研究项目(AGRICOH)纳入的队列研究中得到了统一,该项目聚焦于淋巴血液系统恶性肿瘤的风险。
纳入了三项前瞻性农业队列研究:美国农业健康研究(AHS)、法国农业与癌症研究(AGRICAN)以及挪威农业人口癌症研究(CNAP)。AHS收集了自我报告的农药使用情况。为AGRICAN和CNAP开发了作物暴露矩阵(CEM)。我们通过比较AHS中采用CEM方法估计暴露与自我报告的农药使用情况,探讨了这些暴露评估差异的潜在影响。
在AHS中,99%的参与者被认为接触过农药,AGRICAN中为68%,CNAP中为63%。对于所有合并的队列(n = 316270),在所检查的14个化学组中,暴露患病率在19%至59%之间,在33种活性成分中,暴露患病率在13%至46%之间。在应用CEM的AGRICAN和CNAP中,暴露之间高度相关;在AHS中相关性较低。在AHS中,使用类似于AGRICAN(κ = -0.00至0.33)和CNAP(κ = -0.01至0.14)评估的CEM方法,自我报告的农药使用与指定暴露之间的一致性较差。
我们开发了特定国家的CEM,用于在缺乏特定农药使用自我报告数据的队列中确定农药的职业暴露。所应用的不同暴露评估方法可能高估或低估实际暴露患病率,需要进一步开展工作以更好地估计暴露估计值与实际情况的偏差程度。