The Healthy Worker Effect in Cancer Incidence Studies

Abstract

Use of the general population as a reference might cause serious underestimation of the risk of cancer in working populations because of the healthy worker effect. Using incidence rates, we studied how this underestimation varied according to subtypes of cancer by comparing a large cohort of randomly selected Norwegian workers hired between 1981 and 2003 (n = 366,114) with the general Norwegian population. The cohort was linked to the Cancer Registry of Norway, including all new cancer cases (n = 11,271) reported up to 2003. We found marked potential for the healthy worker effect for overall cancer incidence in male workers (standardized incidence ratio (SIR) = 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.89, 0.93) but not in female workers (SIR = 0.99, 95% confidence interval: 0.95, 1.03). A statistically significantly lower incidence was found among men for cancers of the head and neck (SIR = 0.78), lung (SIR = 0.81), prostate (SIR = 0.93), kidney (SIR = 0.83), and bladder (SIR = 0.77) and for leukemia (SIR = 0.80), whereas an increased incidence was found for malignant melanoma among both men (SIR = 1.09) and women (SIR = 1.29) and for ovarian cancer in women (SIR = 1.32). Depending on the type of cancer being studied, marked potential exists for both underestimation and overestimation of cancer risk when the general population is used as the reference for studies of worker populations.

An empirical assessment of the “healthy prisoner hypothesis”

“…At time 1, we compare the health of individuals who do and do not become incarcerated at time 2. As others have emphasized, an appropriate reference group should be used in studies of the "healthy worker effect" (Kirkeleit et al, 2013). A suitable analysis would compare participants who are similar on characteristics that may predispose them to both poor health and incarceration.…”

A retrospective cohort study of shift work and risk of incident cancer among German male chemical workers

“…A large cohort of randomly selected Norwegian workers indicated an underestimation of overall cancer incidence (SIR 0.91, 95% CI 0.89-0.93) among male workers but potential for both under-and overestimation for some sites of cancer (39). The direction of false estimation depends partly on the occupational exposure and the lifestyle factors that are potentially related with the occupation.…”

Cancer risk among professional inshore divers in Norway

“…The general working population would have been a more suitable reference group in our study. Among occupationally active persons, the cancer incidence is shown to be lower [16], than that for the general population.…”