Local cluster of germ cell cancer in a cohort of male automotive workers in Germany not explained by previous or concurrent activities and exposures in farming and forestry

Objective: To examine whether exposures or activities in farming, forestry and related occupations explain the excess incidence of germ cell cancer (GCC) observed among male employees in one of the six car-manufacturing plants that is located in a geographic area where farming is frequent. Methods: A cohort based case–control study was conducted among workers in six car-manufacturing plants located in areas with different industrial structure. The study involved 188 cases of germ cell cancer identified through active retrieval in 38 hospitals and 1000 controls, drawn from administrative accounting files, individually matched by year of birth (±2 years). Information regarding tasks and exposures and potential confounding variables were obtained by face-to-face or telephone interviews. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using a conditional logistic regression model adjusted for cryptorchidism and other potential confounders. Results: In this case–control study 5.3% of cases and 6.3% of controls ever worked in agriculture or livestock farming. No increased risks were observed for working in agriculture (OR = 0.8 95% CI: 0.4–1.6), livestock farming (OR = 0.8 95% CI: 0.4–1.6) or for exposure to pesticides (OR = 0.7 95% CI: 0.3–1.7), for exposure to fertilizers (OR = 0.8 95% CI: 0.4–1.8) and disinfectants (OR = 1.0 95% CI: 0.3–2.8). There were no statistically significant increases in risk associated with ever exposure to salt based wood protection agents (OR = 2.3 95% CI: 0.6–9.1), working with plywood (OR = 1.4 95% CI: 0.6–3.2), coated wood (OR = 1.4 95% CI: 0.5–3.9) or working in forestry (OR = 1.7 95% CI: 0.5–6.4). Lagging of exposures did not alter the results. Conclusions: The observed excess incidence in the cohort of automotive workers can be hardly explained by previous or concurrent work in farming or forestry. Because of the small numbers of subjects ever employed in farming the statistical power in assessing associations between agricultural work and agricultural exposures was limited and does not allow final conclusions about the association of farming related exposures and GCC risk.