Mitchell Cedar L, Hollister James, Fisher Julia M, Beitel Shawn C, Ramadan Ferris, O'Leary Shawn, Fan Zhihua Tina, Lutrick Karen, Burgess Jefferey L, Ellingson Katherine D
Epidemic Intelligence Service, CDC, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Pima County Health Department, Tucson, AZ, USA.
J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2025 May;35(3):437-444. doi: 10.1038/s41370-025-00753-7. Epub 2025 Mar 6.
Certain occupations have greater risk for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure because of PFAS use in occupation-associated materials.
We sought to assess whether PFAS concentrations differed by occupation among certain Arizona workers and whether concentrations differed over time by occupation.
Serum concentrations for 14 PFAS were measured among 1960 Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Responder, and Other Essential Worker Study participants. Samples were collected at enrollment and periodically during July 2020-April 2023. Occupational categories included firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other essential workers. We fit multilevel regression models for each PFAS to estimate differences in geometric mean concentrations or odds of PFAS detection at enrollment by occupational category. For participants with ≥1 serum sample, we evaluated for yearly longitudinal differences in PFAS concentrations by occupational category. We used other essential workers for comparison, and adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, year, and residential county.
Adjusting for covariates, firefighters had higher perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), branched and linear perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and perfluoroheptanesulfonic acid (PFHpS) concentrations than other essential workers (geometric mean ratios 95% CIs: 1.26 [1.11-1.43]; 1.18 [1.06-1.32]; 1.19 [1.08-1.31]; and 1.19 [1.01-1.39], respectively). Healthcare workers had higher odds of detection of branched perfluorooctanoic acid (Sb-PFOA) and perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) than other essential workers, adjusting for covariates (odds ratios 95% CIs: 1.35 [1.01-1.80]; 2.50 [1.17-5.34], respectively). During the 3-year study, we detected declines in PFAS concentrations among other essential workers; few longitudinal differences in concentrations by occupation were detected.
Using data from a large prospective cohort of frontline workers in Arizona, we compared serum concentrations of 14 per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) among firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other frontline essential workers. We found that firefighters have higher concentrations of certain PFAS chemicals and the odds of detecting other PFAS chemicals are higher among healthcare workers compared with people in other occupations. Our findings highlight the importance of further action to reduce PFAS exposure within highly exposed occupational groups, such as firefighters, and the need to expand evaluation of exposure among other occupations, including healthcare workers.
由于职业相关材料中使用了全氟和多氟烷基物质（PFAS），某些职业接触PFAS的风险更高。
我们试图评估亚利桑那州某些工人的PFAS浓度是否因职业而异，以及浓度是否随时间因职业而有所不同。
在1960名亚利桑那州医疗保健、应急响应人员和其他必要工作人员研究参与者中测量了14种PFAS的血清浓度。在入组时以及2020年7月至2023年4月期间定期采集样本。职业类别包括消防员、其他应急响应人员、医护人员和其他必要工作人员。我们为每种PFAS拟合了多级回归模型，以估计入组时按职业类别划分的几何平均浓度差异或PFAS检测的几率。对于有≥1份血清样本的参与者，我们评估了按职业类别划分的PFAS浓度的年度纵向差异。我们以其他必要工作人员作为对照，并对年龄、性别、种族和民族、年份以及居住县进行了调整。
在调整协变量后，消防员的全氟己烷磺酸（PFHxS）、支链和直链全氟辛烷磺酸（PFOS）以及全氟庚烷磺酸（PFHpS）浓度高于其他必要工作人员（几何平均比95%置信区间：分别为1.26 [1.11 - 1.43]；1.18 [1.06 - 1.32]；1.19 [1.08 - 1.31]；以及1.19 [1.01 - 1.39]）。在调整协变量后，医护人员检测到支链全氟辛酸（Sb - PFOA）和全氟十二烷酸（PFDoA）的几率高于其他必要工作人员（优势比95%置信区间：分别为1.35 [1.01 - 1.80]；2.50 [1.17 - 5.34]）。在为期3年的研究中，我们检测到其他必要工作人员的PFAS浓度有所下降；按职业划分的浓度纵向差异很少被检测到。
利用来自亚利桑那州一线工人大型前瞻性队列的数据，我们比较了消防员、其他应急响应人员、医护人员和其他一线必要工作人员中14种全氟和多氟烷基物质（PFAS）的血清浓度。我们发现，与其他职业相比，消防员某些PFAS化学物质的浓度更高，医护人员检测到其他PFAS化学物质的几率更高。我们的研究结果凸显了采取进一步行动减少高暴露职业群体（如消防员）中PFAS暴露的重要性，以及扩大对包括医护人员在内的其他职业暴露评估的必要性。
