November 2022 additions to NERDB

NERDB is the New and emerging risks database. This bibliographic database is an initiative of Nicole Palmen and Annet Lenderink with the support of Modernet and is currently powered by Airtable.

More information on this database is on the NERDB page

On the website, we will publish regular updates on new disease-exposure combinations we added to the database. Currently, we have 360 entries. Ordered by the year in which the abstract is published

1977	1	2010	11
1988	1	2011	10
1991	1	2012	10
1995	3	2013	13
1997	1	2014	19
1999	2	2015	27
2002	1	2016	21
2005	2	2017	35
2006	1	2018	30
2007	2	2019	52
2008	5	2020	52
2009	3	2021	28
unknown year	6	2022	20

New entries:

INSERM Collective Expertise Centre. (2022). Effects of pesticides on health: New data [Internet].

A pesticide is any substance used to kill, repel, or control certain forms of plant or animal life that are considered to be pests. Concerns have been raised over their possible effects on human health and, more broadly, on the environment, both for pesticides that are currently authorized as well as for those used in the past (some of which are environmentally persistent).

To better assess their effects on health, Inserm was called upon in 2018 by the Directorates General of five ministries to update a collective expert report entitled “Pesticides: Effets sur la santé” published by the institute in 2013.

This collective expert report provides a review of current knowledge in the field through a critical analysis of the international scientific literature published since 2013. More than 5,300 documents were assembled and analyzed by a multidisciplinary group of experts. The report begins with a sociological analysis of the mounting concerns over pesticides and a presentation of knowledge on the exposure of the French population to pesticides.

It then addresses some twenty pathologies, including neuropsychological and motor development disorders in children, cognitive and anxiety-depression disorders in adults, neurodegenerative diseases, and cancers in children and adults.

A final section is devoted to the specific active substances chlordecone and glyphosate, and to the family of succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHi) fungicides. The presumption of a link between pesticide exposure and the development of disease is assessed based on the results of the epidemiologic studies evaluated and is qualified as strong, moderate, or weak. These findings are placed into context with those of toxicological studies to evaluate the biological plausibility of the observed links.

Chuang YS, Lee CY, Lin PC, Pan CH, Hsieh HM, Wu CF, Wu MT. Breast cancer incidence in a national cohort of female workers exposed to special health hazards in Taiwan: a retrospective case-cohort study of ~ 300,000 occupational records spanning 20 years. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2022 Dec;95(10):1979-1993. doi: 10.1007/s00420-022-01897-x. Epub 2022 Jun 30. PMID: 35771278.

Objective: Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women worldwide. In Taiwan, workers exposed to any of 31 hazardous chemicals or carcinogens in the work environment are designated as especially exposed workers (EEWs) by Taiwan’s Ministry of Labor. We assessed the risk of breast cancer in this nationwide female EEW cohort.

Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective study of 4,774,295 workers combining data collected from Taiwan’s Ministry of Labor’s EEW database between 1997 and 2018 and Taiwan’s Cancer Registry between 1997 and 2016. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for women exposed to different hazards and breast cancer incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated by Poisson regression, adjusting for age and duration of exposure.

Results: 3248 female workers with breast cancer and 331,967 without breast cancer were included. The SIRs and adjusted IRRs were 1.27 (95% CI 1.18-1.35) and 1.31 (95% CI 1.21-1.42) for lead, 1.74 (95% CI 1.23-2.24) and 1.52 (95% CI 1.13-2.04) for 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, 1.47 (95% CI 1.12-1.82) and 1.42 (95% CI 1.12-1.81) for trichloroethylene/tetrachloroethylene), 1.40 (95% CI 1.23-1.57) and 1.38 (95% CI 1.22-1.57) for benzene, and 2.07 (95% CI 1.06-3.09) and 1.80 (95% CI 1.10-2.94) for asbestos. The results remained similar when factoring in a 2- or 5-year latency period.

Conclusion: This study found possible correlations between occupational exposure to lead, chlorinated solvents (such as 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, trichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene), benzene, and asbestos with breast cancer risk among female EEW, suggesting a need for regular screening for breast cancer for employees exposed to these special workplace hazards.

Symanzik C, Weinert P, Babić Ž, Hallmann S, Havmose MS, Johansen JD, Kezic S, Macan M, Macan J, Strahwald J, Turk R, van der Molen HF, John SM, Uter W. Skin Toxicity of Selected Hair Cosmetic Ingredients: A Review Focusing on Hairdressers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 21;19(13):7588. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19137588. PMID: 35805241; PMCID: PMC9265752.

The safety assessment of cosmetics considers the exposure of a ‘common consumer’, not the occupational exposure of hairdressers. This review aims to compile and appraise evidence regarding the skin toxicity of cysteamine hydrochloride (cysteamine HCl; CAS no. 156-57-0), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP; CAS no. 9003-39-8), PVP copolymers (CAS no. 28211-18-9), sodium laureth sulfate (SLES; CAS no. 9004-82-4), cocamide diethanolamine (cocamide DEA; CAS no. 68603-42-9), and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB; CAS no. 61789-40-0).

A total of 298 articles were identified, of which 70 were included. Meta-analysis revealed that hairdressers have a 1.7-fold increased risk of developing a contact allergy to CAPB compared to controls who are not hairdressers. Hairdressers might have a higher risk of acquiring quantum sensitization against cysteamine HCl compared to a consumer because of their job responsibilities. Regarding cocamide DEA, the irritant potential of this surfactant should not be overlooked. Original articles for PVP, PVP copolymers, and SLES are lacking.

This systematic review indicates that the current standards do not effectively address the occupational risks associated with hairdressers’ usage of hair cosmetics. The considerable irritant and/or allergenic potential of substances used in hair cosmetics should prompt a reassessment of current risk assessment practices.