OCCUPATIONAL LUNG CANCER
OCCUPATIONAL LUNG CANCER
Anwar Jusuf, Agus Dwi Susanto
Anwar Jusuf, Agus Dwi Susanto
Department of Pulmonology & Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Department of Pulmonology & Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine University Of Indonesia - Persahabatan Hospital-Jakarta
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
“ Occupational cancer is a workplace dangerous problems “
Source :
Source :
International Metal Workers
International Metal Workers
Federation 2007
“
“
Occupational cancer is
Occupational cancer is
the forgotten epidemic “
the forgotten epidemic “
ILO
ILO
“ It estimates occupational cancers make up almost
one-third of all work-related deaths “
Source : Source : International Metal Workers International Metal Workers Federation 2007
How about occupational lung cancer ?
How about occupational lung cancer ?
Occupational lung cancer
Occupational lung cancer
“
“
one of a big problem in occupational cancer “
one of a big problem in occupational cancer “
“
“Inhalation is a most causes“Inhalation is a most causes“
Etiology of Lung Cancer
٨٧% ١٣%
Smoking Other factors
Occupational lung cancer
Occupational lung cancer
Environment & Environment & occupational occupational exposure exposure Smoking is Smoking is the most the most environmental environmental cause in cause in communities communities
EPIDEMIOLOGY
EPIDEMIOLOGY
USA data
USA data
1. Aproximately 6-10% cancers were attributable to
1. Aproximately 6-10% cancers were attributable to
occupational exposure occupational exposure 5% is a lung cancer 5% is a lung cancer
2. Estimated 9000-10.000 men and 900-1900 women
2. Estimated 9000-10.000 men and 900-1900 women
develop lung cancer annually as a result of occupational develop lung cancer annually as a result of occupational
exposureexposure
3. Estimated 3-17% of male lung cancer were attributable to
3. Estimated 3-17% of male lung cancer were attributable to
Increased risk of lung cancer induced by
Increased risk of lung cancer induced by
occupational exposure :
occupational exposure :
Sweden (proportion 9,5%)
Sweden (proportion 9,5%)
Germany
Germany
The Global disease burden from occupational carcinogens
Travis et al Travis et al
Reported analyses of Surveillance,Epidemiology, and End
Reported analyses of Surveillance,Epidemiology, and End
Results (SEER)
Results (SEER) period 1973-1987. period 1973-1987.
•
• The percentage of lung cancers that were adenocarcinoma The percentage of lung cancers that were adenocarcinoma
in all race-sex groups combined increased to 32 percent, in all race-sex groups combined increased to 32 percent,
surpassing squamous cell carcinoma as the most surpassing squamous cell carcinoma as the most
frequentlyoccurring histologic type. frequentlyoccurring histologic type.
•
• Squamous cell carcinoma, however,continues to constitute Squamous cell carcinoma, however,continues to constitute
a large proportion (29 percent) of lung tumors.a large proportion (29 percent) of lung tumors.
Epidemiology of histological types occupational Epidemiology of histological types occupational lung cancer
CARCINOGENS IN WORK PLACE
Almost 150 carcinogen or probable carcinogen in Almost 150 carcinogen or probable carcinogen in
workplace ( IARC)
workplace ( IARC)
Until now
Until now there is :there is :
- 21 agents to be carcinogenic for the human lung
- 21 agents to be carcinogenic for the human lung
- 5 agents as probable human lung carcinogen
- 5 agents as probable human lung carcinogen
- 4 agents to be possible human lung carcinogen
- 4 agents to be possible human lung carcinogen
The single most important occupational "chemical" The single most important occupational "chemical"
cause is asbestos
cause is asbestos
Agents/processes to be carcinogen for the human Agents/processes to be carcinogen for the human
lung (IARC) lung (IARC)
Arsenic/arsenic compoundsArsenic/arsenic compounds AsbestosAsbestos
Chromium/chromium compoundsChromium/chromium compounds Mustard gasMustard gas
Undergound hematite miningUndergound hematite mining Coal gasificationCoal gasification
Coke productionCoke production
Iron and steel foundingIron and steel founding
Talc containing asbestiform fibersTalc containing asbestiform fibers
Alumunium productionAlumunium production
SootSoot
RadonRadon
Sulfuric acid mistSulfuric acid mist
Bis (chloromethyl) ether and Bis (chloromethyl) ether and
chloromethyl methyl ether chloromethyl methyl ether
Cadmium/cadmium compoundsCadmium/cadmium compounds NickelNickel
Spray paintingSpray painting
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin dioxin
Berrylium/berrylium compoundsBerrylium/berrylium compounds Paint manufacturing/paintingPaint manufacturing/painting Chrystalline silicaChrystalline silica
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
Agents/processes to be probable human lung Agents/processes to be probable human lung
carcinogens (IARC) carcinogens (IARC)
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
Agents/processes to be possible human lung Agents/processes to be possible human lung
carcinogens (IARC) carcinogens (IARC)
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
Strength of evidence
Strength of evidence
Site
Site High-risk substance or circumtanceHigh-risk substance or circumtance
Table. Occupational lung carcinogen (IARC)
Table. Occupational lung carcinogen (IARC)
Health prespect 2004; 112: 1447-59.
Relative risk
Relative risk
Relative risk for lung cancer caused by
Relative risk for lung cancer caused by
occupational carcinogen exposure (exclude radon)
occupational carcinogen exposure (exclude radon)
aproximately 1,6
aproximately 1,6
WHO report 2002WHO report 2002
Tobacco and many workplace carcinogens
Tobacco and many workplace carcinogens
“ Multiplicative risk”“ Multiplicative risk”
Table. Estimated relative risks for lung carcinogens
Table. Estimated relative risks for lung carcinogens
WHO report 2002
Relative risk of
Relative risk of
lung cancer due
lung cancer due
Is histological types of lung cancer
Is histological types of lung cancer
associated with spesific agent ?
associated with spesific agent ?
No study has unequivocally demonstrated any one
No study has unequivocally demonstrated any one
lung cancer cell type to be uniquely associated
lung cancer cell type to be uniquely associated
with a spesific agent
with a spesific agent
Many studies have attempted to identify
Many studies have attempted to identify
differences in distribution of histologic types :
differences in distribution of histologic types :
-
-
Arsenic exposure
Arsenic exposure
adenocarcinomas
adenocarcinomas
-
-
(bis)
(bis)
chloromethyl ether
chloromethyl ether
or to
or to
uranium /radon
uranium /radon
- Nickel
- Nickel small cell carcinomas and epidermoid small cell carcinomas and epidermoid
- Vinyl chloride
- Vinyl chloride large cell cancers large cell cancers - Mustard gas
- Mustard gas Squamous cells carcinoma or Squamous cells carcinoma or
undifferentiated lung carcinoma undifferentiated lung carcinoma -
- Silica Silica bronchogenic carcinoma or bronchogenic carcinoma or
undifferentiated lung carcinomaundifferentiated lung carcinoma
AsbestosAsbestos
- All histologic type of lung cancer maybe seen
- All histologic type of lung cancer maybe seen
- Some studies have shown a preponderance of
- Some studies have shown a preponderance of
Pathogenesis
Pathogenesis
Mechanism occupational agent induced lung cancer, almost Mechanism occupational agent induced lung cancer, almost
still unclear
still unclear Arsenic Arsenic
“ “ Induced chromosom malformation in mamalian Induced chromosom malformation in mamalian
cells also in perifer lymphocyte worker who cells also in perifer lymphocyte worker who
exposed arsenic “exposed arsenic “
RadonRadon
“ “ Induced epitelial break and genetic mutation epitelial Induced epitelial break and genetic mutation epitelial
Asbestos induced lung cancer
Asbestos induced lung cancer
Mechanism are not well understoodMechanism are not well understood Some possible mechanism :Some possible mechanism :
1. DNA damaged by reactive oxygen species induced by fiber
1. DNA damaged by reactive oxygen species induced by fiber
2. Direct DNA damaged by physical interactions between
2. Direct DNA damaged by physical interactions between
fibres and target cellsfibres and target cells
3. Enhacement of cells proliferation by fiber
3. Enhacement of cells proliferation by fiber
4. Fibre-provocated chronic inflammatory cytokines and
4. Fibre-provocated chronic inflammatory cytokines and
growth factorsgrowth factors
5. Actions by fibre as co-carcinogens or carrier of chemical
5. Actions by fibre as co-carcinogens or carrier of chemical
Pathogenesis smoking induced lung cancer and interaction with
Pathogenesis smoking induced lung cancer and interaction with
occupational lung carcinogen
occupational lung carcinogen
Asbestos is the most occupational agent
induced lung cancer with relative risk 2,0
WHO report 2002WHO report 2002
Aproximately 6% lung cancer cases in men and
1% in women caused by asbestos exposure
Asbestos caused lung cancer independent or
synergistically with cigarretes smoking
ASBESTOS AND LUNG CANCER
Epidemiology asbestos induced lung cancer
Epidemiology asbestos induced lung cancer
USA USA
In 1990
In 1990 aproximately 1200 cases lung cancer /years aproximately 1200 cases lung cancer /years
Europe :Europe :
11,6% lung cancer cases in Nederland 11,6% lung cancer cases in Nederland
18,3% cases in Italy 18,3% cases in Italy
AsiaAsia
China
China in 1993 there was 67 cases lung cancer caused by in 1993 there was 67 cases lung cancer caused by asbestos exposure
Chest 2003; 123:21-49
Tobacco - Asbestos
AMPHIBOLE
AMPHIBOLE
High carcinogenicity
High carcinogenicity
High carcinogenicity
High carcinogenicity
amphibole
amphibole
maybe
maybe
caused by several factors :
caused by several factors :
long biopersistence
long biopersistence
Fe
Fe
+ +in fibers could catalisis product
in fibers could catalisis product
reactive oxigen radicals
CHRYSOTILE
CHRYSOTILE
Carcinogenicity still debate & controversy
Carcinogenicity still debate & controversy
Some study :
Some study :
Chrysotile
Chrysotile
still carcinogen , but less compare
still carcinogen , but less compare
amphibole.
amphibole.
One of reason,
One of reason,
t
t
here is no asbestos that 100%
here is no asbestos that 100%
chrysotile
Other study :
Other study :
New study showed
New study showed
chrysotile
chrysotile
there is no carcinogen
there is no carcinogen
effect or low carcinogenicity
effect or low carcinogenicity
Hodgson et al.
Hodgson et al.
chrysotile
chrysotile
exposure low risk caused cancer
exposure low risk caused cancer
Bernstein et al
Bernstein et al
Study in rat showed that biopersistence and
Study in rat showed that biopersistence and
clearance
clearance
chrysotile
chrysotile
better than
better than
amphibole
amphibole
.
.
Chrysotile
Chrysotile
fibers had
fibers had
clearance
clearance
fast in lung
fast in lung
(short retension in lung).
(short retension in lung).
DIAGNOSIS & MANAGEMENT
DIAGNOSIS & MANAGEMENT
Diagnosis and management occupationally induced lung Diagnosis and management occupationally induced lung
cancer is not any differently from lung cancer generally
cancer is not any differently from lung cancer generally
Anamnesis :
Anamnesis :
Full occupational and enviromental histories should be Full occupational and enviromental histories should be
considered
considered
Hostory of smoking Hostory of smoking a significant cause a significant cause A latency periode A latency periode 12 – 40 years 12 – 40 years
Investigation
Investigation
Imaging ( Thorax X-ray dan CT)Imaging ( Thorax X-ray dan CT) Sputum cytologySputum cytology
BiopsyBiopsy
BronchoscopyBronchoscopy
Mineralogic analysisMineralogic analysis
To evaluate relevance of occupational exposures to the
To evaluate relevance of occupational exposures to the
development of lung cancer
development of lung cancer
- Bronchoalveolar fluid
- Bronchoalveolar fluid BAL BAL
- Peripheral blood lymphocyte transformation response to
- Peripheral blood lymphocyte transformation response to
berryilumberryilum
- The are no another reliable cellular and serologic test
PREVENTION
PREVENTION
Worker selection Exposure control
Smoking cessation policy National regulatory
“
“ Primary prevention is important to Primary prevention is important to prevent occupational lung cancer”
Worker selection Worker selection Exposure control Exposure control Smoking cessation Smoking cessation policy policy National regulatory National regulatory
•• Preemployement recruitment Preemployement recruitment low risk low risk
•• There are no guideline for worker There are no guideline for worker
selection regarding lung cancer selection regarding lung cancer
except identifying smokers except identifying smokers
Nonsmokers, if exposed asbestos Nonsmokers, if exposed asbestos
•• Limiting occupational exposure Limiting occupational exposure
•• Not fully protect, maybe minimalized Not fully protect, maybe minimalized
risk for lung cancerrisk for lung cancer
•• Most of the agents synergisticMost of the agents synergistic
relationship with tobacco exposurerelationship with tobacco exposure
•• Smoking cessation in and out work place Smoking cessation in and out work place
lower overall risk of lung cancerlower overall risk of lung cancer
••Focus on eliminiation (or minimization) Focus on eliminiation (or minimization)
••Substitute with a less haxardous materialsSubstitute with a less haxardous materials
••Minimize exposure through enginering Minimize exposure through enginering
modificationmodification
••Personal protectivePersonal protective
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
The was estimated increased risk of lung cancer induced The was estimated increased risk of lung cancer induced
by occupational exposure
by occupational exposure
Exposure occupational agent and cigarettes smoking had Exposure occupational agent and cigarettes smoking had
m
multiplicative risk for lung cancerultiplicative risk for lung cancer
A sA single most important occupational "chemical" ingle most important occupational "chemical"
cause of lung cancer is blue asbestos or amphibole
cause of lung cancer is blue asbestos or amphibole
Diagnosis and management occupationally induced lung Diagnosis and management occupationally induced lung
cancer is not any differently from lung cancer generally
cancer is not any differently from lung cancer generally Primary prevention is most important act to prevent Primary prevention is most important act to prevent
occupational lung cancer