CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 141Occupational Health and PerformanceGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFire dynamics and safety research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exposure–Response Relationships for Select Cancer and Non- Cancer Health Outcomes in a Cohort of US Firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia (1950–2009)

Open access
Daniels, Robert D, Bertke, Stephen, Dahm, Matthew M, Yiin, James H, Kubale, Travis L, Hales, Thomas R, Baris, Dalsu, Zahm, Shelia H, Beaumont, James J, Waters, Kathleen M, Pinkerton, Lynne E·2015·Occupational and Environmental Medicine
DOI 10.1136/oemed-2014-102671PMC PMC4558385
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine exposure-response relationships between surrogates of firefighting exposure and select outcomes among previously studied US career firefighters. METHODS: Eight cancer and four non-cancer outcomes were examined using conditional logistic regression. Incidence density sampling was used to match each case to 200 controls on attained age. Days accrued in firefighting assignments (exposed-days), run totals (fire-runs) and run times (fire-hours) were used as exposure surrogates. HRs comparing 75th and 25th centiles of lagged cumulative exposures were calculated using loglinear, linear, log-quadratic, power and restricted cubic spline general relative risk models. Piecewise constant models were used to examine risk differences by time since exposure, age at exposure and calendar period. RESULTS: Among 19,309 male firefighters eligible for the study, there were 1333 cancer deaths and 2609 cancer incidence cases. Significant positive associations between fire-hours and lung cancer mortality and incidence were evident. A similar relation between leukaemia mortality and fire-runs was also found. The lung cancer associations were nearly linear in cumulative exposure, while the association with leukaemia mortality was attenuated at higher exposure levels and greater for recent exposures. Significant negative associations were evident for the exposure surrogates and colorectal and prostate cancers, suggesting a healthy worker survivor effect possibly enhanced by medical screening. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer and leukaemia mortality risks were modestly increasing with firefighter exposures. These findings add to evidence of a causal association between firefighting and cancer. Nevertheless, small effects merit cautious interpretation. We plan to continue to follow the occurrence of disease and injury in this cohort.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/oemed-2014-102671

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rothman, 2008, Modern epidemiology

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 141

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Daniels, R. D., Bertke, S., Dahm, M. M., Yiin, J. H., Kubale, T. L., Hales, T. R., Baris, D., Zahm, S. H., Beaumont, J. J., Waters, K. M., & Pinkerton, L. E.
Affiliations
  • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (US)
  • Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Daniels, Robert D
ORCID
Venue
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-02-11
Volume
72
Issue
10
Pages
699-706
ISSN
  • 0007-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1351-0711
  • 1470-7926
DOI
10.1136/oemed-2014-102671
PMC
PMC4558385
OpenAlex
W2164631102
Cited by
140
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4
FWCI
28.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01pc35139-25-0-11, CC999999, n01pc35136-24-0-2)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (#U55/CCR921930-02)
  • National Cancer Institute (N01PC35136, N01PC35139, N01 PC035139, N01 PC035136, N02 PC015105)
  • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Performance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Fire dynamics and safety research
Keywords
firefighters, exposure-response relationship, lung cancer, leukemia, cancer mortality, cancer incidence, colorectal cancer, prostate cancer, healthy worker survivor effect, occupational cancer risk, cumulative exposure
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cause of Death, Chicago, Humans, Leukemia, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Diseases, Prognosis, Retrospective Studies, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Cohort Studies, Incidence, Proportional Hazards Models, Survival Analysis, Occupational Exposure, Age Distribution, Risk Assessment, Firefighters

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review