Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Feb 2;81(2):109-112.
doi: 10.1136/oemed-2023-108988.

Health Hazard Evaluations of occupational cancer cluster concerns: the USA, January 2001-December 2020

Dallas S Shi  1   2 , Jessica L Rinsky  3 , George R Grimes  3 , Sophia K Chiu  3
Affiliations
Review

Health Hazard Evaluations of occupational cancer cluster concerns: the USA, January 2001-December 2020

Dallas S Shi et al. Occup Environ Med. .

Abstract

Objectives: To describe recent investigations of potential workplace cancer clusters.

Methods: We identified Health Hazard Evaluations (HHEs) of cancer concerns during 2001-2020. We described information about industry, requestors, cancer characteristics, investigative procedures, and determinations about the presence of a cluster (ie, presence of excess cases, unusual case distribution or exposure).

Results: Of 5754 HHEs, 174 included cancer concerns, comprising 1%-5% of HHEs per year. In 123 HHEs, the cancer cluster concerns involved different cancer primary sites. Investigation procedures varied but included record review (n=63, 36%) and site visits (n=22, 13%). Of 158 HHEs with a cluster determination by investigator(s), 151 (96%) were not considered cancer clusters. In seven HHEs, investigators found evidence of a cluster, but occupational exposure to a carcinogen was not identified.

Conclusions: The proportion of HHEs on workplace cancer cluster concerns remained steady over time; most did not meet the definition of a cluster or uncover an occupational cause. Public health practitioners can use this information to provide updated context when addressing workplace cancer cluster concerns and as motivation to refine investigative approaches. More broadly, this review highlights an opportunity to identify best practices on how to apply community cluster investigation methods to the workplace.

Keywords: Occupational Health; Public Health Surveillance; Public health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

    1. Investigating suspected cancer clusters and responding to community concerns: guidelines from CDC and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. MMWR Recomm Rep, 2013. 62(Rr-08): p. 1–24. - PubMed
    1. Renault M. Something Is Wrong Here.’ More than 100 Local Residents Had Brain Tumors, but What Was the Cause?
    1. Goodman M, et al., Cancer cluster investigations: review of the past and proposals for the future. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2014. 11(2): p. 1479–99. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schulte PA, Ehrenberg RL, and Singal M, Investigation of occupational cancer clusters: theory and practice. Am J Public Health, 1987. 77(1): p. 52–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Simpson BW, Truant P, and Resnick BA, Stop and listen to the people: an enhanced approach to cancer cluster investigations. Am J Public Health, 2014. 104(7): p. 1204–8. - PMC - PubMed