1a 1 Male Epigenetics inhibitor Dry-cleaner <1 82 200.1 Lymphosarcoma NAb 2 Male Driver <1 45 200.1 Lymphosarcoma CB diffuse 3 Male Carpet cleaner <1 55 202.2 Mycosis fungoides Vorinostat price Mycosis fungoides 4 Male Dry-cleaner 1–4 60 200.1 Lymphosarcoma T-cell lymphoma 5
Male Driver 5–11 53 200.1 Lymphosarcoma CB/CC follicular lymphoma 6 Male Dry-cleaner 5–11 52 200.1 Lymphosarcoma Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma 7 Male Spot remover 5–11 64 200.1 Lymphosarcoma T-cell lymphoma 8 Male Foreman 5–11 74 202.4 Mycosis fungoides Hairy cell leukaemia 9 Female Shop clerk <1 81 200.1 Lymphosarcoma CB diffuse 10 Female Presser <1 61 200.2 Lymphoma, unspecified NA 11 Female Seamstress 1–4 47 200.1 CRT0066101 price Lymphosarcoma Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma 12 Female Office clerk 1–4 57 200.1 Lymphosarcoma NA 13 Female Seamstress 5–11 67 200.1 Lymphosarcoma NA 14 Female Dry-cleaner, presser 5–11 59 200.1 Lymphosarcoma CB/CC follicular and diffuse lymphoma 15 Female Dry-cleaner, presser 5–11 56 200.1 Lymphosarcoma Follicular
non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma aSystematised nomenclature of medicine, oncology bNot available Discussion In this historically prospective cohort study of cancer incidence in male and female dry-cleaning and laundry workers, an overall cancer incidence close to unity was observed for both genders combined. The placing of employees into discrete exposure categories allowed comparisons to be made between laundry workers
who had little contact with chlorinated solvents or other toxic chemicals and dry-cleaning workers with various degrees of exposure to PER. Evidence presented here showed an increase in lung cancer in male workers without a clear association with PER exposure and a similar increase in lung cancer in female workers, which was confined to workers in genuine laundries. In addition, there was a higher than expected incidence of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in male workers that could not be related to PER. Overall, no specific cancer site or type was clearly associated with PER exposure in either gender. The present study followed over 9,400 subjects for more than two decades, making it one of the largest cohort studies of dry-cleaners and laundry workers to date apart from census-based investigations Phosphatidylethanolamine N-methyltransferase (Malker and Weiner 1984; Lynge and Thygesen 1990; Travier et al. 2002). The main strengths of the study were its prospective design with information on crude qualitative PER exposure collected before follow-up; a contrasting subgroup of laundry workers without known PER exposure; a high follow-up rate (97.2% after exclusions) based on (unique) PINs; the size of the cohort and the long follow-up period plus a valid source for data on the outcome of interest (The Swedish Cancer Register) (Barlow et al. 2009).