Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Assessment of occupational exposure to pesticides in a pooled analysis of agricultural cohorts within the AGRICOH consortium: authors’ response
  1. Maartje Brouwer1,
  2. Leah Schinasi2,
  3. Laura E Beane Freeman3,
  4. Isabelle Baldi4,5,6,
  5. Pierre Lebailly7,8,9,
  6. Gilles Ferro2,
  7. Karl-Christian Nordby10,
  8. Joachim Schüz2,
  9. Maria E Leon2,
  10. Hans Kromhout1
  1. 1 Division of Environmental Epidemiology, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  2. 2 Section of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon, France
  3. 3 Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Bethesda, USA
  4. 4 Laboratoire Santé Travail Environnement, ISPED, Université Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
  5. 5 Epidemiologie-Biostatistique, INSERM, Bordeaux, France
  6. 6 Service de Médecine du Travail, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
  7. 7 Cancers et Préventions, INSERM, Caen, France
  8. 8 Cancers et Préventions, Université Caen Basse-Normandie, Caen, France
  9. 9 Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer François Baclesse, Caen, France
  10. 10 Department of Occupational Medicine and Epidemiology, National Institute of Occupational Health (STAMI), Oslo, Norway
  1. Correspondence to Professor Hans Kromhout, Division of Environmental Epidemiology, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University; P.O. Box 80.178, Utrecht 3584 TD, The Netherlands; h.kromhout{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

In his letter, Tomenson1 provides his opinion on the development and use of crop-exposure matrices (CEMs) in a pooling project within the AGRICOH consortium.2 Although overall his concerns repeat acknowledged limitations of the developed CEMs, discussed in detail in our paper, we disagree with his conclusion.

Tomenson concludes that “it is difficult to see how the pooling project can be worthwhile unless the exposure measures are greatly improved.” Part of this conclusion is based on his interpretation of low agreement between self-reported pesticide use in the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) and exposure assigned to this population using two CEM approaches approximating methods developed …

View Full Text


  • Contributors All authors have been involved in drafting this response letter.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles