11 research outputs found

    Exposure-Response Estimates for Diesel Engine Exhaust and Lung Cancer Mortality Based on Data from Three Occupational Cohorts

    Get PDF
    Background: Diesel engine exhaust (DEE) has recently been classified as a known human carcinogen. Objective: We derived a meta-exposure–response curve (ERC) for DEE and lung cancer mortality and estimated lifetime excess risks (ELRs) of lung cancer mortality based on assumed occupational and environmental exposure scenarios. Methods: We conducted a meta-regression of lung cancer mortality and cumulative exposure to elemental carbon (EC), a proxy measure of DEE, based on relative risk (RR) estimates reported by three large occupational cohort studies (including two studies of workers in the trucking industry and one study of miners). Based on the derived risk function, we calculated ELRs for several lifetime occupational and environmental exposure scenarios and also calculated the fractions of annual lung cancer deaths attributable to DEE. Results: We estimated a lnRR of 0.00098 (95% CI: 0.00055, 0.0014) for lung cancer mortality with each 1-μg/m3-year increase in cumulative EC based on a linear meta-regression model. Corresponding lnRRs for the individual studies ranged from 0.00061 to 0.0012. Estimated numbers of excess lung cancer deaths through 80 years of age for lifetime occupational exposures of 1, 10, and 25 μg/m3 EC were 17, 200, and 689 per 10,000, respectively. For lifetime environmental exposure to 0.8 μg/m3 EC, we estimated 21 excess lung cancer deaths per 10,000. Based on broad assumptions regarding past occupational and environmental exposures, we estimated that approximately 6% of annual lung cancer deaths may be due to DEE exposure. Conclusions: Combined data from three U.S. occupational cohort studies suggest that DEE at levels common in the workplace and in outdoor air appear to pose substantial excess lifetime risks of lung cancer, above the usually acceptable limits in the United States and Europe, which are generally set at 1/1,000 and 1/100,000 based on lifetime exposure for the occupational and general population, respectively. Citation: Vermeulen R, Silverman DT, Garshick E, Vlaanderen J, Portengen L, Steenland K. 2014. Exposure-response estimates for diesel engine exhaust and lung cancer mortality based on data from three occupational cohorts. Environ Health Perspect 122:172–177; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.130688

    Meeting Report: Consensus Statement—Parkinson’s Disease and the Environment: Collaborative on Health and the Environment and Parkinson’s Action Network (CHE PAN) Conference 26–28 June 2007

    Get PDF
    BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder. People with PD, their families, scientists, health care providers, and the general public are increasingly interested in identifying environmental contributors to PD risk.MethodsIn June 2007, a multidisciplinary group of experts gathered in Sunnyvale, California, USA, to assess what is known about the contribution of environmental factors to PD.ResultsWe describe the conclusions around which they came to consensus with respect to environmental contributors to PD risk. We conclude with a brief summary of research needs.ConclusionsPD is a complex disorder, and multiple different pathogenic pathways and mechanisms can ultimately lead to PD. Within the individual there are many determinants of PD risk, and within populations, the causes of PD are heterogeneous. Although rare recognized genetic mutations are sufficient to cause PD, these account for < 10% of PD in the U.S. population, and incomplete penetrance suggests that environmental factors may be involved. Indeed, interplay among environmental factors and genetic makeup likely influences the risk of developing PD. There is a need for further understanding of how risk factors interact, and studying PD is likely to increase understanding of other neurodegenerative disorders

    Distribution of Major Health Risks: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Most analyses of risks to health focus on the total burden of their aggregate effects. The distribution of risk-factor-attributable disease burden, for example by age or exposure level, can inform the selection and targeting of specific interventions and programs, and increase cost-effectiveness. METHODS AND FINDINGS: For 26 selected risk factors, expert working groups conducted comprehensive reviews of data on risk-factor exposure and hazard for 14 epidemiological subregions of the world, by age and sex. Age-sex-subregion-population attributable fractions were estimated and applied to the mortality and burden of disease estimates from the World Health Organization Global Burden of Disease database. Where possible, exposure levels were assessed as continuous measures, or as multiple categories. The proportion of risk-factor-attributable burden in different population subgroups, defined by age, sex, and exposure level, was estimated. For major cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure, cholesterol, tobacco use, fruit and vegetable intake, body mass index, and physical inactivity) 43%–61% of attributable disease burden occurred between the ages of 15 and 59 y, and 87% of alcohol-attributable burden occurred in this age group. Most of the disease burden for continuous risks occurred in those with only moderately raised levels, not among those with levels above commonly used cut-points, such as those with hypertension or obesity. Of all disease burden attributable to being underweight during childhood, 55% occurred among children 1–3 standard deviations below the reference population median, and the remainder occurred among severely malnourished children, who were three or more standard deviations below median. CONCLUSIONS: Many major global risks are widely spread in a population, rather than restricted to a minority. Population-based strategies that seek to shift the whole distribution of risk factors often have the potential to produce substantial reductions in disease burden

    Lung cancer risk in painters: a meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    We conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively compare the association between occupation as a painter and the incidence or mortality from lung cancer. PubMed and the reference lists of pertinent publications were searched and reviewed. For the meta-analysis, we used data from 47 independent cohort, record linkage, and case-control studies (from a total of 74 reports), including > 11,000 incident cases or deaths from lung cancer among painters. Three authors independently abstracted data and assessed study quality. The summary relative risk (meta-RR, random effects) for lung cancer in paint-ers was 1.35 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-1.41; 47 studies] and 1.35 (95% CI, 1.21-1.51; 27 studies) after controlling for smoking. The relative risk was higher in never-smokers (meta-RR = 2.00; 95% CI, 1.09-3.67; 3studies) and persisted when restricted to studies that adjusted for other occupational exposures (meta-RR = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.21-2.04; 5 studies). These results support the conclusion that occupational exposures in painters are causally associated with the risk of lung cancer

    Lung cancer risk in painters: a meta-analysis Risco de câncer de pulmão em pintores: uma meta-análise

    No full text
    We conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively compare the association between occupation as a painter and the incidence or mortality from lung cancer. PubMed and the reference lists of pertinent publications were searched and reviewed. For the meta-analysis, we used data from 47 independent cohort, record linkage, and case-control studies (from a total of 74 reports), including > 11,000 incident cases or deaths from lung cancer among painters. Three authors independently abstracted data and assessed study quality. The summary relative risk (meta-RR, random effects) for lung cancer in paint-ers was 1.35 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-1.41; 47 studies] and 1.35 (95% CI, 1.21-1.51; 27 studies) after controlling for smoking. The relative risk was higher in never-smokers (meta-RR = 2.00; 95% CI, 1.09-3.67; 3studies) and persisted when restricted to studies that adjusted for other occupational exposures (meta-RR = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.21-2.04; 5 studies). These results support the conclusion that occupational exposures in painters are causally associated with the risk of lung cancer.<br>Conduziu-se uma meta-análise para comparar quatitativamente a associação entre o trabalho de pintor e a incidência ou mortalidade por câncer de pulmão. PubMed e listas de referência de publicações pertinentes foram pesquisadas e revisadas. Para a análise, foram usados dados de 47 estudos de caso, coorte independente e ligação de dados (de um total de 74 relatórios), incluindo > 11 mil casos de incidentes ou morte por câncer de pulmão entre pintores. Três autores coletaram dados e avaliaram a qualidade de estudo. O risco relativo (meta-RR, efeitos aleatórios) de câncer de pulmão em pintores foi de 1,35 [95% intervalo de confiança (IC), 1,29-1,41; 47 estudos] e 1,35 (95% IC, 1,21-1,51; 27 estudos) depois de se destacar os fumantes. O risco relativo foi maior naqueles que nunca fumaram (meta-RR = 2.00; 95% CI, 1,09-3,67; 3 estudos) e persistiu quanto restringido a estudos que foram ajustados para outras exposições ocupacionais (meta-RR = 1,57; 95% CI, 1,21-2,04; 5 estudos). Estes resultados sustentam a conclusão de que exposições ocupacionais em pintores são causadamente associada com o risco de câncer de pulmão
    corecore