Abstract
Background
Previous results from the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study (DEMS) demonstrated a positive exposure–response relation between lung cancer and respirable elemental carbon (REC), a key surrogate for diesel exhaust exposure. Two issues have been raised regarding DEMS: (i) the use of historical carbon monoxide (CO) measurements to calibrate models used for estimating historical exposures to REC in the DEMS exposure assessment; and (ii) potential confounding by radon.
Methods
We developed alternative REC estimates using models that did not rely on CO for calibration, but instead relied on estimated use of diesel equipment, mine ventilation rates and changes in diesel engine emission rates over time. These new REC estimates were used to quantify cumulative REC exposure for each subject in the nested case-control study. We conducted conditional logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for lung cancer. To evaluate the impact of including radon as a potential confounder, we estimated ORs for average REC intensity adjusted for cumulative radon exposure in underground miners.
Results
Validation of the new REC exposure estimates indicated that they overestimated historical REC by 200–400%, compared with only 10% for the original estimates. Effect estimates for lung cancer using these alternative REC exposures or adjusting for radon typically changed by <10% when compared with the original estimates.
Conclusions
These results emphasize the robustness of the DEMS findings, support the use of CO for model calibration and confirm that radon did not confound the DEMS estimates of the effect of diesel exposure on lung cancer mortality.
Previous results from the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study (DEMS) demonstrated a positive exposure–response relation between lung cancer and respirable elemental carbon (REC), a key surrogate for diesel exhaust exposure. Two issues have been raised regarding DEMS: (i) the use of historical carbon monoxide (CO) measurements to calibrate models used for estimating historical exposures to REC in the DEMS exposure assessment; and (ii) potential confounding by radon.
Methods
We developed alternative REC estimates using models that did not rely on CO for calibration, but instead relied on estimated use of diesel equipment, mine ventilation rates and changes in diesel engine emission rates over time. These new REC estimates were used to quantify cumulative REC exposure for each subject in the nested case-control study. We conducted conditional logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for lung cancer. To evaluate the impact of including radon as a potential confounder, we estimated ORs for average REC intensity adjusted for cumulative radon exposure in underground miners.
Results
Validation of the new REC exposure estimates indicated that they overestimated historical REC by 200–400%, compared with only 10% for the original estimates. Effect estimates for lung cancer using these alternative REC exposures or adjusting for radon typically changed by <10% when compared with the original estimates.
Conclusions
These results emphasize the robustness of the DEMS findings, support the use of CO for model calibration and confirm that radon did not confound the DEMS estimates of the effect of diesel exposure on lung cancer mortality.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 459-466 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | International Journal of Epidemiology |
| Volume | 49 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2020 |
Bibliographical note
Cited By :1Export Date: 8 December 2021
Keywords
- Diesel
- radon
- lung cancer
- exposure assessment
