Comparison of expert and job-exposure matrix-based retrospective exposure assessment of occupational carcinogens in the Netherlands Cohort Study

Objectives Reliable retrospective exposure assessment continues to be a challenge in most population-based studies. Several methodologies exist for estimating exposures retrospectively, of which case-by-case expert assessment and job-exposure matrices (JEMs) are commonly used. This study evaluated the reliability of exposure estimates for selected carcinogens obtained through three JEMs by comparing the estimates with case-by-case expert assessment within the Netherlands Cohort Study (NLCS). Methods The NLCS includes 58 279 men aged 55–69 years at enrolment in 1986. For a subcohort of these men (n=1630), expert assessment is available for exposure to asbestos, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and welding fumes. Reliability of the different JEMs (DOMJEM (asbestos, PAHs), FINJEM (asbestos, PAHs and welding fumes) and Asbestos JEM (asbestos) was determined by assessing the agreement between these JEMs and the expert assessment. Results Expert assessment revealed the lowest prevalence of exposure for all three exposures (asbestos 9.3%; PAHs 5.3%; welding fumes 11.7%). The DOMJEM showed the highest level of agreement with the expert assessment for asbestos and PAHs (κs=0.29 and 0.42, respectively), closely followed by the FINJEM. For welding fumes, concordance between the expert assessment and FINJEM was high (κ=0.70). The Asbestos JEM showed poor agreement with the expert asbestos assessment (κ=0.10). Conclusions This study shows case-by-case expert assessment to result in the lowest prevalence of occupational exposure in the NLCS. Furthermore, the DOMJEM and FINJEM proved to be rather similar in agreement when compared with the expert assessment. The Asbestos JEM appeared to be less appropriate for use in the NLCS.

[1]  R A Goldbohm,et al.  A large-scale prospective cohort study on diet and cancer in The Netherlands. , 1990, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[2]  T. Kauppinen,et al.  Occupational exposure to silica and lung cancer risk in the Netherlands , 2009, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[3]  H. Kromhout,et al.  Semiquantitative Estimates of Exposure to Methylene Chloride and Styrene: The Influence of Quantitative Exposure Data , 1991 .

[4]  A. Burdorf,et al.  Occupational characteristics of cases with asbestos-related diseases in The Netherlands. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[5]  T D Koepsell,et al.  Assessment of occupational exposures in community-based case-control studies. , 1998, Annual review of public health.

[6]  A. Olshan,et al.  Occupational exposure assessment in case–control studies: opportunities for improvement , 2002, Occupational and environmental medicine.

[7]  Paolo Boffetta,et al.  Listing Occupational Carcinogens , 2004, Environmental health perspectives.

[8]  Patricia A Stewart,et al.  Comparison of occupational exposure assessment methods in a case–control study of lead, genetic susceptibility and risk of adult brain tumours , 2010, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[9]  J. Wilkins,et al.  Assessing agreement between two job-exposure matrices. , 1997, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[10]  E. Imbernon,et al.  The use of job exposure matrices for cancer epidemiology research and surveillance , 2002 .

[11]  Paul Swuste,et al.  Linking expert judgement and trends in occupational exposure into a job-exposure matrix for historical exposure to asbestos in the Netherlands. , 2008, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[12]  H Kromhout,et al.  Performance of two general job-exposure matrices in a study of lung cancer morbidity in the Zutphen cohort. , 1992, American journal of epidemiology.

[13]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Development of an exposure measurement database on five lung carcinogens (ExpoSYN) for quantitative retrospective occupational exposure assessment. , 2012, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[14]  T. Kauppinen,et al.  Construction of job-exposure matrices for the Nordic Occupational Cancer Study (NOCCA) , 2009, Acta oncologica.

[15]  H Kromhout,et al.  Assessment of occupational exposures in a general population: comparison of different methods. , 1999, Occupational and environmental medicine.

[16]  A. Burdorf,et al.  An expert system for the evaluation of historical asbestos exposure as diagnostic criterion in asbestos-related diseases. , 1999, Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

[17]  Tony Fletcher,et al.  Assessing Exposure Misclassification by Expert Assessment in Multicenter Occupational Studies , 2003, Epidemiology.

[18]  Caroline Sabin,et al.  Medical Statistics at a Glance , 2000 .

[19]  K. Straif,et al.  Comparison of exposure assessment methods for occupational carcinogens in a multi-centre lung cancer case–control study , 2010, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[20]  R Saracci,et al.  Highlights of the 1990 Leesburg, Virginia, International Workshop on Retrospective Exposure Assessment for Occupational Epidemiology Studies. , 1991, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[21]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Trends in inhalation exposure--a review of the data in the published scientific literature. , 2007, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[22]  T Kauppinen,et al.  From cross-tabulations to multipurpose exposure information systems: a new job-exposure matrix. , 1998, American journal of industrial medicine.

[23]  N. Rothman,et al.  Combining a job-exposure matrix with exposure measurements to assess occupational exposure to benzene in a population cohort in shanghai, china. , 2012, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[24]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  JEMs and incompatible occupational coding systems: effect of manual and automatic recoding of job codes on exposure assignment. , 2013, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[25]  G. Benke,et al.  Retrospective assessment of occupational exposure to chemicals in community-based studies: validity and repeatability of industrial hygiene panel ratings. , 1997, International journal of epidemiology.

[26]  J. Vlaanderen,et al.  Guidelines to Evaluate Human Observational Studies for Quantitative Risk Assessment , 2008, Environmental health perspectives.

[27]  R. Goldbohm,et al.  Occupational exposure to carcinogens and risk of lung cancer: results from The Netherlands cohort study. , 1997, Occupational and environmental medicine.

[28]  Mustafa Dosemeci,et al.  Inter-rater agreement of assessed prenatal maternal occupational exposures to lead. , 2006, Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology.