Occupational lung cancer cases remain largely under-reported and under-compensated worldwide. In order to improve the detection and compensation of work-related lung cancers, we implemented a systematic screening of occupational exposures, combining a validated self-administered questionnaire to assess occupational exposures and a specialized occupational cancer consultation. After a pilot study, the present prospective, open-label, scale-up study aimed to assess this systematic screening of occupational exposures in lung cancer patients in five sites in France by associating university hospitals with cancer centers. Patients with lung cancer were sent a self-administered questionnaire to collect their job history and potential exposure to lung carcinogens. The questionnaire was assessed by a physician to determine if a specialized occupational cancer consultation was required. During the consultation, a physician assessed if the lung cancer was occupation-related and, if it was, delivered a medical certificate to claim for compensation. Patients were offered help from a social worker for the administrative procedure. Over 15 months, 1251 patients received the questionnaire and 462 returned it (37%). Among them, 176 patients (38.1%) were convened to the occupational cancer consultation and 150 patients attended the consultation. An exposure to occupational lung carcinogen was identified in 133 patients and a claim for compensation was judged possible for 90 patients. A medical certificate was delivered to 88 patients and 38 patients received compensation. Our national study demonstrated that a systematic screening of occupational exposures is feasible and will bring a significant contribution to improve the detection of occupational exposures in lung cancer patients.

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), multiple myeloma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia are possibly related to environmental and/or occupational exposure. The primary objective of this study was to develop a questionnaire for screening patients with these blood disorders who might benefit from a specialized consultation for possible recognition of the disease as an occupational disease. The study included 205 subjects (male gender, 67.3%; mean age, 60 years; NHL, 78.5%). The questionnaire performed very satisfactorily in identifying the exposures most frequently retained by experts for their potential involvement in the occurrence of NHL. Its sensitivity and specificity in relation to the final expertise were 96% and 96% for trichloroethylene, 85% and 82% for benzene, 78% and 87% for solvents other than trichloroethylene and dichloromethane, 87% and 95% for pesticides, respectively. Overall, 15% of the subjects were invited to ask National Social Insurance for compensation as occupational disease. These declarations concerned exposure to pesticides (64%), solvents (trichloroethylene: 29%; benzene: 18%; other than chlorinated solvents: 18%) and sometimes multiple exposures. In conclusion, this questionnaire appears as a useful tool to identify NHL patients for a specialized consultation, in order to ask for compensation for occupational disease.