Paper: Occupational carcinogens: Current knowledge, gaps, and stakeholder perspectives

Author(s) and Affiliation(s):
Aaron Blair, Occupational Cancer Research Centre
Paul Demers, University of British Columbia
Karin Hohenadel, Occupational Cancer Research Centre
Shelley Harris, Occupational Cancer Research Centre
Daniel Bukvic, Occupational Cancer Research Centre
Erin Pichora, Occupational Cancer Research Centre
Loraine Marrett, Occupational Cancer Research Centre
Download Presentation PDF:
Day/Time: Saturday at 11:15
Room: Giovanni Room, 2nd Floor
Objectives:

The research effort on occupational cancer has been diminishing for several decades. The Occupational Cancer Research Centre (OCRC) was launched to revitalize this research area in Ontario. To help develop Centre research priorities, we have reviewed the literature for gaps, and surveyed stakeholders in the occupational cancer community to understand their concerns regarding occupational exposures. This presentation will describe our current understanding of workplace carcinogens, identify knowledge gaps, and characterize the needs of the stakeholder community.

Methods:

Contents of the IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans were reviewed and summarized to describe our understanding of occupational exposures as possible carcinogens, and to identify gaps in our understanding. Special attention was paid to the depth and breadth of studies on women and minorities. Stakeholder views were sought through a web-based survey administered by OCRC between June and July, 2009.

Results:

According to IARC Monograph evaluations, occupational exposures represent between one-third and one-half of all exposures classified as sufficient, probable, and possible human carcinogens. Many occupational carcinogens have been identified, but a far larger number need further evaluation. In addition, much of the literature examined focused on white men, pointing to a deficiency in the amount of research including women and minority populations. OCRC received 177 completed surveys from the stakeholder community. Nearly 100 workplace exposures were identified as concerns for occupational cancer research. Although numbers were small, there was some suggestion that priority exposures differ somewhat by respondents’ occupational role.

Conclusions:

Both the number of occupational exposures established as carcinogenic to humans and the number of suspected exposures in need of further investigation underscore the importance of increasing capacity for research in occupational cancer. Deficits in research looking at women and minority populations also highlight the need to diversify efforts put forth in this field. The Occupational Cancer Research Centre hopes to contribute by developing and carrying out a research program that addresses knowledge gaps found in the literature, while attempting to address concerns identified by the stakeholder community.