Cohort Mortality Study of North American Industrial Sand Workers. III. Estimation of Past and Present Exposures to Respirable Crystalline Silica

The prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal): A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large number of individual experts. Evidence from human, animal and mechanistic data suggests that occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal dust) causes pneumoconiosis. In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust. These estimates of prevalences and levels will serve as input data for estimating (if feasible) the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years that are attributable to occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust among working-age (≥ 15 years) workers.

DATA SOURCES

We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA

We included working-age (≥ 15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (< 15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included all study types with objective dust or fibre measurements, published between 1960 and 2018, that directly or indirectly reported an estimate of the prevalence and/or level of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and/or coal dust.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, then data were extracted from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates by industrial sector (ISIC-4 2-digit level with additional merging within Mining, Manufacturing and Construction) using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and all available authors assessed the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight studies (82 cross-sectional studies and 6 longitudinal studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising > 2.4 million measurements covering 23 countries from all WHO regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, South-East Asia, Europe, and Western Pacific). The target population in all 88 included studies was from major ISCO groups 3 (Technicians and Associate Professionals), 6 (Skilled Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Workers), 7 (Craft and Related Trades Workers), 8 (Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers), and 9 (Elementary Occupations), hereafter called manual workers. Most studies were performed in Construction, Manufacturing and Mining. For occupational exposure to silica, 65 studies (61 cross-sectional studies and 4 longitudinal studies) were included with > 2.3 million measurements collected in 22 countries in all six WHO regions. For occupational exposure to asbestos, 18 studies (17 cross-sectional studies and 1 longitudinal) were included with > 20,000 measurements collected in eight countries in five WHO regions (no data for Africa). For occupational exposure to coal dust, eight studies (all cross-sectional) were included comprising > 100,000 samples in six countries in five WHO regions (no data for Eastern Mediterranean). Occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust was assessed with personal or stationary active filter sampling; for silica and asbestos, gravimetric assessment was followed by technical analysis. Risk of bias profiles varied between the bodies of evidence looking at asbestos, silica and coal dust, as well as between industrial sectors. However, risk of bias was generally highest for the domain of selection of participants into the studies. The largest bodies of evidence for silica related to the industrial sectors of Construction (ISIC 41-43), Manufacturing (ISIC 20, 23-25, 27, 31-32) and Mining (ISIC 05, 07, 08). For Construction, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.93, 17 studies, I2 91%, moderate quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91, 24 studies, I2 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. The pooled prevalence estimate for Mining was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, 20 studies, I2 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.04 mg/m3 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, 17 studies, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Crop and animal production (ISIC 01; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Professional, scientific and technical activities (ISIC 71, 74; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level). For asbestos, the pooled prevalence estimate for Construction (ISIC 41, 43, 45,) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.87, six studies, I2 99%, low quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing (ISIC 13, 23-24, 29-30), the pooled prevalence and level estimates were rated as being of very low quality of evidence. Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Other mining and quarrying (ISIC 08; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation (ISIC 37; very low quality of evidence for levels). For coal dust, the pooled prevalence estimate for Mining of coal and lignite (ISIC 05), was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00, six studies, I2 16%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.77 mg/m3 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.86, three studies, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). A small body of evidence was identified for Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35); with very low quality of evidence for prevalence, and the pooled level estimate being 0.60 mg/m3 (95% CI -6.95 to 8.14, one study, low quality of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we judged the bodies of evidence for occupational exposure to silica to vary by industrial sector between very low and moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and very low and low for level. For occupational exposure to asbestos, the bodies of evidence varied by industrial sector between very low and low quality of evidence for prevalence and were of very low quality of evidence for level. For occupational exposure to coal dust, the bodies of evidence were of very low or moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and low for level. None of the included studies were population-based studies (i.e., covered the entire workers' population in the industrial sector), which we judged to present serious concern for indirectness, except for occupational exposure to coal dust within the industrial sector of mining of coal and lignite. Selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica by industrial sector are considered suitable as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, and selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to asbestos and coal dust may perhaps also be suitable for estimation purposes. Protocol identifier: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.005. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084131.

Evaluation of workplace exposure to respirable crystalline silica in road construction industries in Alberta

Occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) is common for several occupations in construction, not only because of its presence in many handling materials but also in processes such as grinding and sawing. This study investigated workplace exposure to RCS as quartz in industries and occupations within road construction in Alberta through the RCS monitoring database provided by the Alberta Roadbuilders and Heavy Construction Association (ARHCA) between 2007 and 2016. Descriptive statistics were calculated for exposure-related variables, and mixed model analysis was performed to determine factors affecting the exposure levels. Results showed that the highest exposed workers were in the sand and gravel industry (GM = 45 μg/m³). For worker occupations, geometric means ranged from 78 μg/m³ for crusher operators to 10 μg/m³ for concrete truck operators. The maximum exposure severity was 33.3 times the occupational exposure limit (OEL) for the sand and gravel and 31 times the OEL for tower operators. The results also showed the effect of seasonal variability on RCS exposure levels. The heterogeneous exposure results indicated significant room for improvement and that controls should focus more on the activity performed than the occupation to lower exposure to RCS levels in industries.

Retrospective Assessment of Respirable Quartz Exposure for a Silicosis Study of the Industrial Sand Industry

Background

In 2016, the OSHA PEL for crystalline silica was reduced, renewing interest in evaluating risk of silicosis from occupational exposures. The industrial sand industry, which deals with high-purity quartz sands, is the setting for a current epidemiologic investigation of silicosis risk and progression. In support of that investigation, respirable quartz (RQ) exposures were retrospectively estimated for 67 workers with silicosis and 167 matched control workers from 21 industrial sand plants, in which some started work as early as 1929.

Methods

A job exposure matrix (JEM) was constructed by integrating a modern (post-1970) RQ exposure database containing more than 40000 measurements with archival particle count exposure data from a 1947 survey. A simulation algorithm was used to develop a conversion factor to convert the archival particle count data into modern measures of RQ by randomly generating 100000 virtual dust particles of varying diameters corresponding to the size distributions of 14 archival particle size distribution samples. The equivalent respirable mass and particle counts of the virtual particles were calculated, totalled, and ratioed to derive the conversion factor. The JEM was integrated with individual job histories to calculate average and cumulative exposure for each case and control. Multiple exposure estimates were derived for unprotected exposures as well as for exposures adjusted for estimated respiratory protective equipment use and efficiency.

Results

The mean of the count to respirable mass conversion factors derived from 14 archival particle size samples was 157 µg m-3 per mppcf (SD: 42; range: 96-263) with no statistical difference across process areas (drying, screening, vibrating, binning, bulk loading, bagging), P = 0.29. The JEM demonstrated an industry-wide decrease in prevailing exposures to RQ of up to about 2 orders of magnitude from the distant (1929) to the recent (2012) past. Unadjusted cumulative exposures for cases and controls were statistically different (P < 0.001) with respective medians (range) of 3764 µg m-3 year (221-25121) and 1595 µg m-3 year (0-16446). Adjustment of exposure for use of respiratory protection showed modest reductions in estimated exposure: median adjusted cumulative exposures assuming a protection factor of 5 were 86% and 77% of the unadjusted values for cases and controls, respectively.

Conclusions

The industrial sand industry offers a unique setting for examination of silicosis risk because of the high silica content of industrial sand and a long history of radiographic silicosis surveillance of industry workers. However, the great majority of silicosis cases in this industry are found among former workers and are associated with exposures occurring in the distant past, which necessitates extensive retrospective exposure assessment and increases the likelihood of exposure misclassification. Nonetheless, the estimated cumulative exposures for silicosis cases and controls in this work were significantly different, with the median cumulative exposure for cases being more than twice that of their matched controls.

A novel strategy for retrospective exposure assessment in the Norwegian silicon carbide industry

The objective was to construct a retrospective job-exposure matrix (JEM) for the Norwegian silicon carbide industry. More than 3300 historical total dust measurements were available (1967-2005); however, there were few measurements of other agents. Total dust measurements were therefore used as the basis for the JEM, and a novel method was developed to estimate exposure to other agents. Multiple linear regression models were developed to describe historical exposure to total dust. Exposure estimates were extrapolated backward to periods without exposure data by adjustments for process and work-hour related changes. An exposure assessment study was performed where total dust was sampled in parallel with fibers or respirable dust. The respirable dust was analyzed for the content of quartz, cristobalite, and silicon carbide. Mixed-effect models were developed to estimate the exposure to these agents from total dust exposure, plant, and job group. Exposure to asbestos and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons was assigned qualitatively. Multiple linear regression models of total dust described historical exposure best in the furnace department (R(2) (adj) = 0.49-0.74). Models in the other departments explained less variance (R(2) (adj) = 0.12-0.32). Exposure determinants and total dust explained a substantial proportion of the between- (70-100%) and within-worker (8.0-54%) variance in the mixed-effect models. The relative bias between available historical measurements and the estimated exposure to dust components varied between -39% (fiber) and 40% (quartz). However, corrections were not considered necessary due to limitations in the historical data. The component-specific metrices were sufficiently different from each other (r(Pearson) < 0.7), with the exception of total and respirable dust (r(Pearson) = 0.84) and total dust and cristobalite (r(Pearson) = 0.72), and will enable component-specific epidemiologic analyses in the future. Improved and less correlated estimates of exposure levels for the different components in the dust were obtained with the updated exposure assessment. Due to limitations in the measurement data, assumptions had to be made, especially in the period before 1967. [Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene for the following free supplemental resource: a file containing tables outlining multiple linear regression models for prediction of total dust exposure in the processing departments of Norwegian SiC producing plants, evaluation of the predictive abilities of the reduced total dust models, and mixed models for pedicting exposure to fibers and respirable quartz, cristobalite, non-fibrous silicon carbide and respirable dust from total dust exposure.].

Crystalline silica and lung cancer: a critical review of the occupational epidemiology literature of exposure-response studies testing this hypothesis

IARC (2009; Metals, Particles and Fibres. IARC Monographs on the Evaluaton of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Volume 100C. Lyon, France: IARC) concluded that crystalline silica in occupational settings is a lung carcinogen. This conclusion is based primarily on studies with exposure-response (E-R) analyses and a pooled analysis of 10 major studies with about 1000 lung cancer cases. The purpose of this review is to critically assess this cancer classification based on E-R analyses in 18 studies from eight countries with about 2000 lung cancer cases and the same database used by IARC (2009) . The most appropriate exposure-response analysis is selected from latest study with least effect from bias, confounding, and presented graphically to assist individual assessment of the weight of evidence. Strength of association is consistently weak in the majority of studies. At the highest exposure level the mean relative risk (RR) is 1.5; four studies have strong associations (RRs > 2), three have moderate strong associations (RRs 1.5-2.0), six have weak-negligible associations (RRs 1-1.5), and five have no associations (RRs ≤1.0). Biological gradients were an inconsistent finding. Three studies had clear positive E-R trends; 3 had suggestive trends; and 12 had no E-R trends, 9 of which were flat or negative. There was a negative ER slope using RRs at the highest exposure of each study. Consistent findings of weak associations and lack of E-R trends does not support a causal association. Weight of evidence from occupational epidemiology does not support a causal association of lung cancer and silica exposure, which is contrary to the IARC conclusion using essentially the same data.

Quantitative crystalline silica exposure assessment for a historical cohort epidemiologic study in the German porcelain industry

A time-dependent quantitative exposure assessment of silica exposure among nearly 18,000 German porcelain workers was conducted. Results will be used to evaluate exposure-response disease risks. Over 8000 historical industrial hygiene (IH) measurements with original sampling and analysis protocols from 1954-2006 were obtained from the German Berufs- genossenschaft der keramischen-und Glas-Industrie (BGGK) and used to construct a job exposure matrix (JEM). Early measurements from different devices were converted to modern gravimetric equivalent values. Conversion factors were derived from parallel historical measurements and new side-by-side measurements using historical and modern devices in laboratory dust tunnels and active workplace locations. Exposure values were summarized and smoothed using LOESS regression; estimates for early years were derived using backward extrapolation techniques. Employee work histories were merged with JEM values to determine cumulative crystalline silica exposures for cohort members. Average silica concentrations were derived for six primary similar exposure groups (SEGs) for 1938-2006. Over 40% of the cohort accumulated <0.5 mg; just over one-third accumulated >1 mg/m(3)-years. Nearly 5000 workers had cumulative crystalline silica estimates >1.5 mg/m(3)-years. Similar numbers of men and women fell into each cumulative exposure category, except for 1113 women and 1567 men in the highest category. Over half of those hired before 1960 accumulated >3 mg/m(3)-years crystalline silica compared with 4.9% of those hired after 1960. Among those ever working in the materials preparation area, half accumulated >3 mg/m(3)-year compared with 12% of those never working in this area. Quantitative respirable silica exposures were estimated for each member of this cohort, including employment periods for which sampling used now obsolete technologies. Although individual cumulative exposure estimates ranged from background to about 40 mg/m(3)-years, many of these estimates reflect long-term exposures near modern exposure limit values, allowing direct evaluation of lung cancer and silicosis risks near these limits without extrapolation. This quantitative exposure assessment is the largest to date in the porcelain industry.