ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A two-fold risk increase to develop basal cell carcinoma was seen in outdoor workers exposed to high solar UV radiation compared to controls. However, there is an ongoing discussion whether histopathological subtype, tumor localization and Fitzpatrick phototype may influence the risk estimates. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of histological subtype, tumor localization and Fitzpatrick phototype on the risk to develop basal cell carcinoma in highly UV-exposed cases and controls compared to those with moderate or low solar UV exposure. METHODS: Six hundred forty-three participants suffering from incident basal cell carcinoma in commonly sun-exposed anatomic sites (capillitium, face, lip, neck, dorsum of the hands, forearms outside, décolleté) of a population-based, case-control, multicenter study performed from 2013 to 2015 in Germany were matched to controls without skin cancer. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted stratified for histological subtype, phototype 1/2 and 3/4. Dose-response curves adjusted for age, age2, sex, phototype and non-occupational UV exposure were calculated. RESULTS: Participants with high versus no (OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.24-3.50; p = 0.006) or versus moderate (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.15-3.65; p = 0.015) occupational UV exposure showed a more than two-fold significantly increased risk to develop BCC in commonly UV-exposed body sites. Multivariate regression analysis did not show an influence of phototype or histological subtype on risk estimates. The restriction of the analysis to BCC cases in commonly sun-exposed body sites did not influence the risk estimates. The occupational UV dosage leading to a 2-fold increased basal cell carcinoma risk was 6126 standard erythema doses. CONCLUSION: The risk to develop basal cell carcinoma in highly occupationally UV-exposed skin was doubled consistently, independent of histological subtype, tumor localization and Fitzpatrick phototype.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is one of the most frequent types of cancer constituting a significant public health burden. Prevention strategies focus on limiting ultraviolet (UV) exposure during leisure time. However, the relative impact of occupational and nonoccupational UV exposure for SCC occurrence is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between occupational and nonoccupational UV exposure for SCC in a multicentre population-based case-control study hypothesizing that high occupational UV exposure increases the risk of SCC. METHODS: Consecutive patients with incident SCC (n = 632) were recruited from a German national dermatology network. Population-based controls (n = 996) without history of skin cancer were recruited from corresponding residents' registration offices and propensity score matched to cases. Lifetime UV exposure, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were assessed by trained physicians. Occupational and nonoccupational UV exposure doses were estimated by masked investigators using established reference values. Odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were assessed using conditional logistic regression adjusting for relevant confounders. RESULTS: Total solar UV exposure was significantly associated with increased SCC. The OR for high (> 90th percentile) vs. low (< 40th percentile) and high vs, moderate (40-59th percentile) occupational UV exposure was 1·95 (95% CI 1·19-3·18) and 2·44 (95% CI 1·47-4·06) for SCC. Adjusting for occupational UV exposure, nonoccupational UV exposure was not significantly related to SCC incidence. Dose-response relationships were observed for occupational but not for nonoccupational solar UV exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Solar occupational UV exposure is a major determinant of incident SCC. Our findings indicate that prevention strategies should be further expanded to the occupational setting.
