Original article

Scand J Work Environ Health 2002;28(4):270-277    pdf


Occupation as a risk factor for uveal melanoma in Germany

by Monárrez-Espino J, Stang A, Bromen K, Merzenich H, Anastassiou G, Jöckel K-H

Objectives This study explored occupational risks linked to uveal melanoma.

Methods The analysis pooled data from two case-referent studies (hospital- and population-based) conducted in Germany between 1995 and 1998, with incident cases matched with several referents by age, gender, and region of residence. The subjects were contacted through personal or telephone interviews. Their exposure status was based on their occupational history. Dichotomous coding for the main task and categorization into different occupational classification systems was performed. Altogether of 118 cases and 475 referents were included. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated by conditional logistic regression.

Results Relevant occupations included food, beverage, and tobacco processors [odds ratio (OR) 4.7, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.99-22.0] and miners (OR 2.3, 95% CI 0.92-5.99) among the men and station, engine and heavy equipment operators and freight handlers (OR 2.5, 95% CI 0.94-6.58) and medical, dental, pharmaceutical and veterinary workers (OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.71-6.02) among the women according to the International Standard Classification of Occupations, whereas, according to the European Industrial Classification, the relevant occupations were the food industry (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.08-10.5) and the chemical and pharmaceutical industry (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.01-7.78) among the men and machine production (OR 3.2, 95% CI 0.96-10.7) and health and veterinary sector (OR 2.4, 95% CI 0.97-5.71) among the women.

Conclusions These analyses support the potential role of occupational exposure as a risk factor for uveal melanoma. The findings must be interpreted carefully since the exposure was assessed indirectly.

This article refers to the following text of the Journal: 1996;22(1):14-26
The following article refers to this text: 2012;38(5):476-483