Semiconductor Work and the Risk of Spontaneous Abortion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lee

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Background: With the development of the semiconductor industry over the past 60 years, various occupational diseases have been reported to coincide with rapid industrial growth. Among these occupational diseases, the association between semiconductor work and cancers, including leukemia, remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis assesses the associations between semiconductor work, leukemia, and cancer risk. Methods: The core research databases, including PubMed, were screened for studies published until 31 July 2022. All eligible studies assessed cancer risk among workers in the semiconductor industry. Results: Nine studies were selected after a literature review. The employment period of semiconductor workers in each study was between 1965 and 2009. Semiconductor work was not significantly associated with the risk of leukemia (Relative Risk [RR], 1.02; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.74–1.41) or cancer (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.93–1.07). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, semiconductor work was not significantly associated with leukemia or cancer risk. Internal comparisons, such as non-fab workers, quality of the study, employment period, and healthy worker effect, should be considered for interpretation. Furthermore, a prospective cohort study based on overall semiconductor workers in the industry could be useful to assess occupational disease risk as a mandatory component of health assessment.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Semiconductor Work, Leukemia, and Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lee

et al. 2022

Self Cite

“…The first epidemiological occupational study from the United Kingdom reported that the risk of cancer incidence and death were high in the semiconductor industries [ 6 ]. Since then, many studies have been conducted to assess the association between occupational exposure in the semiconductor industry and occupational diseases as a cohort or systematic review [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. However, it was difficult to assess causality because of the controversy between the studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Assessment of Potential Exposure to Occupational Substances in Current Semiconductor Workers with at Least 5 Years of Employment

Jang

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Background: this study aimed to conduct a biological assessment of the potential exposure to carcinogenic substances in current semiconductor workers. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 306 semiconductor workers. The assessed biomarkers were as follows: (benzene) urine S-phenylmercapturic, trans,trans-muconic acid, blood benzene; (trichloroethylene) urine trichloroacetic acid; (2-ethoxyethanol) 2-ethoxyacetic acid; (arsine) urine arsenic3+, arsenic5+, monomethylarsonic, dimethylarsinic acid, arsenobetaine; (shift work) 6-hydroxymelatonin; (smoking) cotinine, and (radiation). The detection rate of these materials is defined as more than the biological exposure index (BEI) or the previous reference value. Results: Some workers exposed to trans,trans-muconic acid, trichloroacetic acid, and arsenic5+ showed high BEI levels. Generally, there was no difference according to job categories, and workers were suspected to be exposed to other sources. The melatonin concentration tended to decrease when working at night, and cotinine was identified as an excellent surrogate marker for smoking. In the case of radiation exposure, there was no significant difference in the number of stable chromosome translocation in 19 semiconductor workers. Their estimated radiation exposure level was below the limit of detection (LOD) or near the LOD level. Conclusion: In this study, most carcinogens were below the BEI level, but verification through re-measurement was needed for workers who were identified to have a high BEI level. For continuous monitoring, a prospective cohort is necessary to deal with the healthy worker effect and assess additional materials.

“…In the 1980s, as an occupational disease, the risk of spontaneous abortion among semiconductor workers was first reported [1]. Since then, research about workers' health problems, such as cancers, reproductive hazards, etc., and hazardous substances or detailed semiconductor processes that cause health effects in workplaces have been published [2][3][4][5][6][7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Status, Health-Related Factors and Work Environment in Korean Semiconductor Workers between 1984–2012: A Qualitative Study and a Cross-Sectional Study

Jang

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Background: The environment of semiconductor facilities and exposure status has undergone changes. To identify changes in the work environment, health status, and risk factors, a qualitative and cross-sectional study was conducted. Methods: For the qualitative study, 38 current and retired workers who worked for at least 10-years were studied; for the cross-sectional study, 306 current workers who worked for at least 5-years based on JEM strata from Samsung Electronics were selected. Participants were asked about occupational history, cancer-relating risk factors during the working period, medical history, dietary habits for the past year, and hematological cancer-relating infection. Results: In the qualitative study, fabrication workers reported bladder cystitis, dermatitis in hands, gastritis/ulcer, and dry eye as frequent symptoms during work environment changes (manual to automatic process). In the cross-sectional study, there were no abnormal findings for infection biomarkers related to hematological cancer and spontaneous abortion, and their general health status was no different from the general population. Also, questionnaire feasibility was evaluated for the applicability in the prospective cohort. Conclusion: Current semiconductor workers’ health status was good compared to other populations. For lifelong health assessment, a cohort study is needed which considers health worker effects and current environments.