ObjectivesWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate potential associations between firefighting and police occupations, and prostate cancer incidence and mortality.MethodsOriginal epidemiological studies published from 1980 to 2017 were identified through PubMed and Web of Science. Studies were included if they contained specific job titles for ever/never firefighting and police work and associated prostate cancer risk estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Study quality was assessed using a 20-point checklist. Prostate cancer meta-risk estimates (mRE) and corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for firefighting and police work separately and by various study characteristics using random effects models. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 score. Publication bias was assessed using Begg’s and Egger’s tests.ResultsA total of 26 firefighter and 12 police studies were included in the meta-analysis, with quality assessment scores ranging from 7 to 19 points. For firefighter studies, the prostate cancer incidence mRE was 1.17 (95% CI = 1.08–1.28, I2 = 72%) and the mortality mRE was 1.12 (95% CI = 0.92–1.36, I2 = 50%). The mRE for police incidence studies was 1.14 (95% CI = 1.02–1.28; I2 = 33%); for mortality studies, the mRE was 1.08 (95% CI = 0.80–1.45; I2 = 0%). By study design, mREs for both firefighter and police studies were similar to estimates of incidence and mortality.ConclusionSmall excess risks of prostate cancer were observed from firefighter studies with moderate to substantial heterogeneity and a relatively small number of police studies, respectively. There is a need for further studies to examine police occupations and to assess unique and shared exposures in firefighting and police work.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12940-017-0336-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

As there are no well‐established modifiable risk factors for prostate cancer, further evidence is needed on possible factors such as occupation. Our study uses one of the largest Canadian worker cohorts to examine occupation, industry, and prostate cancer and to assess patterns of prostate cancer rates. The Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC) was established by linking the 1991 Canadian Census Cohort to the Canadian Cancer Database (1969–2010), Canadian Mortality Database (1991–2011), and Tax Summary Files (1981–2011). A total of 37,695 prostate cancer cases were identified in men aged 25–74 based on age at diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazards ratios and 95% confidence intervals. In men aged 25–74 years, elevated risks were observed in the following occupations: senior management (HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.04–1.20); office and administration (HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.11–1.27); finance services (HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.04–1.14); education (HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.00–1.11); agriculture and farm management (HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06–1.17); farm work (HR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.01–1.21); construction managers (HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01–1.14); firefighting (HR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.01–1.36); and police work (HR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.09–1.36). Decreased risks were observed across other construction and transportation occupations. Results by industry were consistent with occupation results. Associations were identified for white‐collar, agriculture, protective services, construction, and transportation occupations. These findings emphasize the need for further study of job‐related exposures and the potential influence of nonoccupational factors such as screening practices.