Assessment of the effect of occupational exposure to formaldehyde on the risk of lung cancer in two Canadian population-based case–control studies

Mahboubi, Amel; Koushik, Anita; Siemiatycki, Jack; Lavoué, Jérôme; Rousseau, Marie‐Claude

doi:10.5271/sjweh.3344

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, no increase in risk was observed with age at first exposure, time since first exposure, and maximum intensity of exposure. The authors concluded that FA exposure was not associated with an increased lung cancer risk, which they found was in agreement with majority of studies reported in the scientific literature (Mahboubi et al 2013). In the NCI cohort, there was no increase in lung cancer risk in the highest exposure category in any of the exposure metrics (Beane Freeman et al 2013).…”

Section: Carcinogenicitysupporting

confidence: 87%

Re-evaluation of the WHO (2010) formaldehyde indoor air quality guideline for cancer risk assessment

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2010, the World Health Organization (WHO) established an indoor air quality guideline for short- and long-term exposures to formaldehyde (FA) of 0.1 mg/m3 (0.08 ppm) for all 30-min periods at lifelong exposure. This guideline was supported by studies from 2010 to 2013. Since 2013, new key studies have been published and key cancer cohorts have been updated, which we have evaluated and compared with the WHO guideline. FA is genotoxic, causing DNA adduct formation, and has a clastogenic effect; exposure–response relationships were nonlinear. Relevant genetic polymorphisms were not identified. Normal indoor air FA concentrations do not pass beyond the respiratory epithelium, and therefore FA’s direct effects are limited to portal-of-entry effects. However, systemic effects have been observed in rats and mice, which may be due to secondary effects as airway inflammation and (sensory) irritation of eyes and the upper airways, which inter alia decreases respiratory ventilation. Both secondary effects are prevented at the guideline level. Nasopharyngeal cancer and leukaemia were observed inconsistently among studies; new updates of the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) cohort confirmed that the relative risk was not increased with mean FA exposures below 1 ppm and peak exposures below 4 ppm. Hodgkin’s lymphoma, not observed in the other studies reviewed and not considered FA dependent, was increased in the NCI cohort at a mean concentration ≥0.6 mg/m3 and at peak exposures ≥2.5 mg/m3; both levels are above the WHO guideline. Overall, the credibility of the WHO guideline has not been challenged by new studies.

show abstract

Section: Carcinogenicitysupporting

confidence: 87%

Re-evaluation of the WHO (2010) formaldehyde indoor air quality guideline for cancer risk assessment

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Six articles were found via citation search and four were included after checking their eligibility, whereas two were discarded due to the difficulty of extrapolating FA exposure. At the end of the process, 21 articles were included in the systematic review [ 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ]. The PRISMA Flow Diagram is available as Supplementary Materials (Figure S1) .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Carcinogenic Effects of Formaldehyde Occupational Exposure: A Systematic Review

Protano

Buomprisco

Cammalleri

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Formaldehyde, classified as a carcinogen in 2004, as of today is widely used in many work activities. From its classification, further studies were performed to evaluate its carcinogenicity. The aim of the systematic review is to update the evidence on occupational exposure to formaldehyde and cancer onset. Methods: The review, in accordance with the PRISMA statement, includes articles in English reporting original results of studies conducted on workers exposed to formaldehyde, considering all types of cancer, published from 1 January 2000 to 30 July 2021 and selected from the Pubmed and Scopus databases. The studies’ quality was assessed by the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: A total of 21 articles were included, conducted in different European, American, and Asian countries. The most investigated occupational areas are those characterized by a deliberate use of formaldehyde. Some studies evaluated all types of cancer, whereas others focused on specific sites such as thyroid and respiratory, lymphohematopoietic, or central nervous systems. The results showed weak associations with lung cancer, nasopharyngeal cancer, leukemia, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Conclusions: The results demonstrate the need for further original studies carried out on representative samples of workers exposed to measured levels of FA. These studies should be designed to reduce the bias due to co-exposure to other carcinogens.

show abstract

“…Formaldehyde may reduce asthma control (McGwin et al, 2010;Nurmatov et al, 2015). Short-term pulmonary edema and diminished lung function changes have demonstrated dose-effect responses (Mahboubi, Koushik, Siemiatycki, Lavoue, & Rousseau, 2013). Low levels of exposure from indoor formaldehyde off-gassing is commonly correlated with sick building syndrome (Dantoft, Andersson, Nordin, & Skovbjerg, 2015;Lind et al, 2017).…”

Section: Health Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen, with causal links to cancers of the nasopharynx, sinus, and a less consistent causal relationship to cancers of hematopoietic sites (National Toxicology Program, 2016;Pira, Romano, Verga, & La Vecchia, 2014;Viegas et al, 2010). Both short-term and long-term pulmonary edema and diminished lung function are also linked to dose-effect responses, but there is no consistent link to lung cancer incidence (Mahboubi et al, 2013). However, the cause-effect, dose-response relationship in community-based and occupational cohort studies have been inconsistent and difficult to establish due to complex, confounding exposure mixtures (Mahboubi et al, 2013;Marsh, Stone, Esmen, Henderson, & Lee, 1996;Pira et al, 2014).…”

Section: Health Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both short-term and long-term pulmonary edema and diminished lung function are also linked to dose-effect responses, but there is no consistent link to lung cancer incidence (Mahboubi et al, 2013). However, the cause-effect, dose-response relationship in community-based and occupational cohort studies have been inconsistent and difficult to establish due to complex, confounding exposure mixtures (Mahboubi et al, 2013;Marsh, Stone, Esmen, Henderson, & Lee, 1996;Pira et al, 2014).…”

Section: Health Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Community interest and feasibility of using a novel smartphone‐based formaldehyde exposure detection technology

Castner¹,

Gehrke

Shapiro

et al. 2018

Public Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Assessment of the effect of occupational exposure to formaldehyde on the risk of lung cancer in two Canadian population-based case–control studies

Cited by 18 publications

References 25 publications

Re-evaluation of the WHO (2010) formaldehyde indoor air quality guideline for cancer risk assessment

Re-evaluation of the WHO (2010) formaldehyde indoor air quality guideline for cancer risk assessment

The Carcinogenic Effects of Formaldehyde Occupational Exposure: A Systematic Review

Community interest and feasibility of using a novel smartphone‐based formaldehyde exposure detection technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About