Affordable Access

deepdyve-link
Publisher Website

Imunophenotypic Evaluation as a Tool for Monitoring Risks for Blood Malignancies in Gas Station Workers.

Authors
  • Santiago, Fabio1, 2
  • Lima, Simone1, 2
  • Antunes, Susani1
  • Silvestre, Rafaele Tavares1, 2
  • Scherrer, Luciano Rios3
  • Alves, Gilda1, 2
  • Ribeiro-Carvalho, Marilza de M1
  • Ornellas, Maria Helena1, 2
  • 1 Laboratory of Circulating Markers, Department of Pathology and Laboratories, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Email: [email protected] , (Brazil)
  • 2 Postgraduate in Medical Sciences (PGCM), Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. , (Brazil)
  • 3 Kennedy College, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. , (Brazil)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP
Publication Date
Jul 01, 2019
Volume
20
Issue
7
Pages
2109–2115
Identifiers
DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.7.2109
PMID: 31350973
Source
Medline
Keywords
Language
English
License
Unknown

Abstract

Background: Gas station workers are exposed to carcinogenic substances with impact on the hematologic and immune systems. The aim was to apply the immunophenotyping as a tool in the biological monitoring. Methods: This is a workplace-based case-control study with 49 workers and 26 controls. Medical interviews, hematological exams, and immunophenotyping analyses were performed. According to risk behavior (cleaning flannel and mistrust in the automatic fuel supply) the workers were divided into two groups: low risk (group 1) and high risk (group 2). Results: The results showed that CD16, HLA-DR, CD25, CD56+, CD16 CD56 low, and CD56 high expressions were higher in workers when compared to the control group (P =0.020, P =0.001, P =0.001; P =0.034, P=0.023, and P =0.008, respectively). The expressions of CD2, CD8, CD10, CD8low, and CD4/CD8 ratios were lower (P =0.016, P =0.001, P=0.001, P= 0.017, P = 0.0259, and P =0.029, respectively). Headache and paresthesia complaints were associated with workers when compared to the control group (OR = 4.091, 95% CI, 1.400 -11.951, P = 0.014; OR =12.12, 95% CI, 1.505 - 97.61, P =0.004). Using cleaning flannel and mistrust in the automatic fuel supply (risk behaviors) were associated with group 2 (OR = 9.71, 95% CI, 2.60-36.26, P = 0.005; OR = 18.18, 95% CI, 2.04-161.37, P = 0.004). Conclusions: The results strengthen the worker’s immunosuppression hypothesis, which may contribute to some disorders and the carcinogenesis process. The evaluation of the immune system by flow cytometry is a promising tool for monitoring blood malignancy risk in addition to regular classic hematological exams.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times