This is the first description of the Norwegian Fire Departments Cohort. Among male firefighters in the cohort, incidence of urinary tract cancer, laryngeal cancer, and mesothelioma was elevated. The observed risk patterns may reflect firefighters' occupational exposures to carcinogens, and efforts to reduce exposure through improved quality and use of protective equipment should be maintained.

Background Meta-analyses have shown firefighters to be at an increased risk of several cancer types. Occupational carcinogen exposure may explain these increased risks. This study aims to describe Norwegian fire departments' work conditions from 1950 until today, focusing on factors relevant for potential occupational carcinogen exposure. Methods With the help of a reference group, we developed a questionnaire on topics related to occupational exposure to carcinogens for the period 1950–2018. Selected Norwegian fire departments provided department-specific responses. Results Sixteen departments, providing fire services for 48% of the Norwegian population as of 2019 and mainly consisting of professional firefighters, responded to our questionnaire. The introduction of synthetic firefighting foams, more regular live fire training, the introduction of chemical diving, and a higher number of diesel-driven fire service vehicles were identified as changes thought to increase exposure to occupational carcinogens. Changes thought to decrease exposure included the switch from negative to positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatuses, the use of self-contained breathing apparatuses during all phases of firefighting, the use of ventilating fans during firefighting, increased attention to flammable materials used during live fire training, increased attention to handling and cleaning of turnout gear and other equipment, and installment of exhaust removal systems in apparatus bays. Conclusion Norwegian fire departments' work conditions have seen several changes since 1950, and this could influence firefighters' occupational carcinogen exposure. A peak of carcinogen exposure may have occurred in the 1970s and 1980s before recent changes have reduced exposure.

ObjectivesTo examine age at diagnosis, prognostic factors and survival of prostate cancer (PCa) in Norwegian firefighters and three other occupations undergoing occupational health check-ups, and comparing with PCa cases in the general population.MethodsAll PCa cases diagnosed in 1960–2017 were extracted from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Firefighters, military employees, pilots and police officers were identified through occupational data from Statistics Norway. Age at diagnosis, clinical stage, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score, performance status and overall survival and PCa-specific survival in cases in these occupations were compared with cases in the general population.ResultsFirefighters were significantly younger at PCa diagnosis than cases in the general population in 1960–1993 (mean difference: 2.1 years) and 2007–2017 (mean difference: 4.3 years). At diagnosis, firefighters had significantly lower PSA values, Gleason scores and performance status scores than the general population. Firefighters diagnosed in 2007–2017 had lower risk of all-cause death than the general population (crude HR 0.71 (0.53–0.95)). No difference remained after adjusting for age at diagnosis (HR 1.03 (0.77–1.37)). Firefighters were older at diagnosis in 1994–2006 (mean difference: 3.0 years), but showed no other significant differences in age at diagnosis, PSA values, Gleason scores or performance status compared with military employees, pilots and police officers.ConclusionsYounger age and better prognostic factors at PCa diagnosis among firefighters and other occupations with requirements for health check-ups than cases in the general population may indicate an increased diagnostic intensity, likely contributing to elevated PCa incidence in such occupations.

40.2%, 40.4%, and 37.5%, respectively. 96.3% of them were full-vaccinated or get a booster shot. There was no significant difference in the breakthrough infection rate of workers in these three work settings no matter getting two or three shots of vaccine. Conclusions Workplace infection especially after full vaccination is not an important SARS-CoV-2 transmission pathway.