TY - JOUR
T1 - Exposure-Response Analyses of Asbestos and Lung Cancer Subtypes in a Pooled Analysis of Case-Control Studies.
AU - Olsson, Ann C
AU - Vermeulen, Roel
AU - Schüz, Joachim
AU - Kromhout, Hans
AU - Pesch, Beate
AU - Peters, Susan
AU - Behrens, Thomas
AU - Portengen, Lützen
AU - Mirabelli, Dario
AU - Gustavsson, Per
AU - Kendzia, Benjamin
AU - Almansa, Josue
AU - Luzon, Veronique
AU - Vlaanderen, Jelle
AU - Stücker, Isabelle
AU - Guida, Florence
AU - Consonni, Dario
AU - Caporaso, Neil
AU - Landi, Maria Teresa
AU - Field, John
AU - Brüske, Irene
AU - Wichmann, Heinz-Erich
AU - Siemiatycki, Jack
AU - Parent, Marie-Elise
AU - Richiardi, Lorenzo
AU - Merletti, Franco
AU - Jöckel, Karl-Heinz
AU - Ahrens, Wolfgang
AU - Pohlabeln, Hermann
AU - Plato, Nils
AU - Tardón, Adonina
AU - Zaridze, David
AU - McLaughlin, John
AU - Demers, Paul
AU - Szeszenia-Dabrowska, Neonila
AU - Lissowska, Jolanta
AU - Rudnai, Peter
AU - Fabianova, Eleonora
AU - Stanescu Dumitru, Rodica
AU - Bencko, Vladimir
AU - Foretova, Lenka
AU - Janout, Vladimir
AU - Boffetta, Paolo
AU - Bueno-de-Mesquita, Bas
AU - Forastiere, Francesco
AU - Brüning, Thomas
AU - Straif, Kurt
PY - 2017/3
Y1 - 2017/3
N2 - BACKGROUND Evidence is limited regarding risk and the shape of the exposure-response curve at low asbestos exposure levels. We estimated the exposure-response for occupational asbestos exposure and assessed the joint effect of asbestos exposure and smoking by sex and lung cancer subtype in general population studies. METHODS We pooled 14 case-control studies conducted in 1985-2010 in Europe and Canada, including 17,705 lung cancer cases and 21,813 controls with detailed information on tobacco habits and lifetime occupations. We developed a quantitative job-exposure-matrix to estimate job-, time period-, and region-specific exposure levels. Fiber-years (ff/ml-years) were calculated for each subject by linking the matrix with individual occupational histories. We fit unconditional logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and trends. RESULTS The fully adjusted OR for ever-exposure to asbestos was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.18, 1.31) in men and 1.12 (95% CI, 0.95, 1.31) in women. In men, increasing lung cancer risk was observed with increasing exposure in all smoking categories and for all three major lung cancer subtypes. In women, lung cancer risk for all subtypes was increased in current smokers (ORs ~two-fold). The joint effect of asbestos exposure and smoking did not deviate from multiplicativity among men, and was more than additive among women. CONCLUSIONS Our results in men showed an excess risk of lung cancer and its subtypes at low cumulative exposure levels, with a steeper exposure-response slope in this exposure range than at higher, previously studied levels. (See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B161.).
AB - BACKGROUND Evidence is limited regarding risk and the shape of the exposure-response curve at low asbestos exposure levels. We estimated the exposure-response for occupational asbestos exposure and assessed the joint effect of asbestos exposure and smoking by sex and lung cancer subtype in general population studies. METHODS We pooled 14 case-control studies conducted in 1985-2010 in Europe and Canada, including 17,705 lung cancer cases and 21,813 controls with detailed information on tobacco habits and lifetime occupations. We developed a quantitative job-exposure-matrix to estimate job-, time period-, and region-specific exposure levels. Fiber-years (ff/ml-years) were calculated for each subject by linking the matrix with individual occupational histories. We fit unconditional logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and trends. RESULTS The fully adjusted OR for ever-exposure to asbestos was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.18, 1.31) in men and 1.12 (95% CI, 0.95, 1.31) in women. In men, increasing lung cancer risk was observed with increasing exposure in all smoking categories and for all three major lung cancer subtypes. In women, lung cancer risk for all subtypes was increased in current smokers (ORs ~two-fold). The joint effect of asbestos exposure and smoking did not deviate from multiplicativity among men, and was more than additive among women. CONCLUSIONS Our results in men showed an excess risk of lung cancer and its subtypes at low cumulative exposure levels, with a steeper exposure-response slope in this exposure range than at higher, previously studied levels. (See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B161.).
U2 - 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000604
DO - 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000604
M3 - Article
C2 - 28141674
SN - 1044-3983
VL - 28
SP - 288
EP - 299
JO - Epidemiology
JF - Epidemiology
IS - 2
ER -