Exposure-Response Analyses of Asbestos and Lung Cancer Subtypes in a Pooled Analysis of Case-Control Studies

International audienceBACKGROUND: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.)

Assessing exposure misclassification by expert assessment in multicenter occupational studies.

BACKGROUND: In a multicenter case-control study of lung cancer in central and eastern Europe and in Liverpool, exposure to occupational agents was assessed by teams of local experts. We performed an interteam agreement study to estimate the levels of exposure misclassification and the expected attenuation of the risk estimate. METHODS: Eight teams of experts and a reference rater assessed exposure to 70 putative lung carcinogens for 19 jobs. Agreement among teams was calculated through Cohen's kappa, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: Each team showed an overall fair to good agreement with the reference (kappa between 0.53 and 0.64). The agreement among teams in the presence of exposure was excellent for 9 agents, fair to good for 16, and poor for 29. For all agents the specificity was high (average 0.94), although sensitivity varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: This study of expert exposure assessment showed a small range in reliability among teams of experts, but large differences among agents. This paper presents the range in levels of misclassification that can be expected using experts for assessing occupational exposure to different agents, and the attenuation of the odds ratio that can be expected to result from this misclassification

Is previous respiratory disease a risk factor for lung cancer? All source(s) of support in the form of grants, gifts, equipment, and/or drugs

Abstract word count: 248 Main body word count: 3,500 Scientific Knowledge on the Subject: Chronic bronchitis, emphysema, tuberculosis, pneumonia and asthma when examined in isolation have been associated with an increased risk of lung cancer diagnoses. What This Study Adds to the Field: Our results from a very large pooled study show that chronic bronchitis and emphysema are positively associated with lung cancer, after accounting for other pulmonary diseases. The positive association between pneumonia and lung cancer was stronger when diagnosed 2 years or fewer prior to lung cancer diagnoses, compared to longer. Co-occurrence of chronic bronchitis, emphysema and pneumonia had a stronger association with lung cancer, compared to any one condition. Asthma diagnosed 5 or more years prior was inversely related to lung cancer, and no association was observed when asthma co-occurred with chronic bronchitis. This article has an online data supplement, which is accessible from this issue's table of content online a

Occupational prestige, social mobility and the association with lung cancer in men.

International audienceThe nature of the association between occupational social prestige, social mobility, and risk of lung cancer remains uncertain. Using data from the international pooled SYNERGY case-control study, we studied the association between lung cancer and the level of time-weighted average occupational social prestige as well as its lifetime trajectory. We included 11,433 male cases and 14,147 male control subjects. Each job was translated into an occupational social prestige score by applying Treiman's Standard International Occupational Prestige Scale (SIOPS). SIOPS scores were categorized as low, medium, and high prestige (reference). We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI), adjusting for study center, age, smoking, ever employment in a job with known lung carcinogen exposure, and education. Trajectories in SIOPS categories from first to last and first to longest job were defined as consistent, downward, or upward. We conducted several subgroup and sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our results. We observed increased lung cancer risk estimates for men with medium (OR = 1.23; 95 % CI 1.13-1.33) and low occupational prestige (OR = 1.44; 95 % CI 1.32-1.57). Although adjustment for smoking and education reduced the associations between occupational prestige and lung cancer, they did not explain the association entirely. Traditional occupational exposures reduced the associations only slightly. We observed small associations with downward prestige trajectories, with ORs of 1.13, 95 % CI 0.88-1.46 for high to low, and 1.24; 95 % CI 1.08-1.41 for medium to low trajectories. Our results indicate that occupational prestige is independently associated with lung cancer among men

Lung cancer and socioeconomic status in a pooled analysis of case-control studies

International audienceBACKGROUND: An association between low socioeconomic status (SES) and lung cancer has been observed in several studies, but often without adequate control for smoking behavior. We studied the association between lung cancer and occupationally derived SES, using data from the international pooled SYNERGY study.METHODS: Twelve case-control studies from Europe and Canada were included in the analysis. Based on occupational histories of study participants we measured SES using the International Socio-Economic Index of Occupational Status (ISEI) and the European Socio-economic Classification (ESeC). We divided the ISEI range into categories, using various criteria. Stratifying by gender, we calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) by unconditional logistic regression, adjusting for age, study, and smoking behavior. We conducted analyses by histological subtypes of lung cancer and subgroup analyses by study region, birth cohort, education and occupational exposure to known lung carcinogens.RESULTS: The analysis dataset included 17,021 cases and 20,885 controls. There was a strong elevated OR between lung cancer and low SES, which was attenuated substantially after adjustment for smoking, however a social gradient persisted. SES differences in lung cancer risk were higher among men (lowest vs. highest SES category: ISEI OR 1.84 (95% CI 1.61-2.09); ESeC OR 1.53 (95% CI 1.44-1.63)), than among women (lowest vs. highest SES category: ISEI OR 1.54 (95% CI 1.20-1.98); ESeC OR 1.34 (95% CI 1.19-1.52)).CONCLUSION: SES remained a risk factor for lung cancer after adjustment for smoking behavior

Is previous respiratory disease a risk factor for lung cancer?

RATIONALE: Previous respiratory diseases have been associated with increased risk of lung cancer. Respiratory conditions often co-occur and few studies have investigated multiple conditions simultaneously. OBJECTIVES: Investigate lung cancer risk associated with chronic bronchitis, emphysema, tuberculosis, pneumonia, and asthma. METHODS: The SYNERGY project pooled information on previous respiratory diseases from 12,739 case subjects and 14,945 control subjects from 7 case-control studies conducted in Europe and Canada. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to investigate the relationship between individual diseases adjusting for co-occurring conditions, and patterns of respiratory disease diagnoses and lung cancer. Analyses were stratified by sex, and adjusted for age, center, ever-employed in a high-risk occupation, education, smoking status, cigarette pack-years, and time since quitting smoking. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Chronic bronchitis and emphysema were positively associated with lung cancer, after accounting for other respiratory diseases and smoking (e.g., in men: odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.48 and OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.87, respectively). A positive relationship was observed between lung cancer and pneumonia diagnosed 2 years or less before lung cancer (OR, 3.31; 95% CI, 2.33-4.70 for men), but not longer. Co-occurrence of chronic bronchitis and emphysema and/or pneumonia had a stronger positive association with lung cancer than chronic bronchitis "only." Asthma had an inverse association with lung cancer, the association being stronger with an asthma diagnosis 5 years or more before lung cancer compared with shorter. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this large international case-control consortium indicate that after accounting for co-occurring respiratory diseases, chronic bronchitis and emphysema continue to have a positive association with lung cancer

Lung cancer risk among cooks when accounting for tobacco smoking: a pooled analysis of case-control studies from Europe, Canada, New Zealand, and China

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the risk of lung cancer among cooks, while controlling for smoking habits. METHODS: We used data from the SYNERGY project including pooled information on lifetime work histories and smoking habits from 16 case-control studies conducted in Europe, Canada, New Zealand, and China. RESULTS: Before adjustment for smoking, we observed an increased risk of lung cancer in male cooks, but not in female cooks. After adjusting, there was no increased risk and no significant exposure-response relationship. Nevertheless, subgroup analyses highlighted some possible excess risks of squamous cell carcinoma and small cell carcinoma in female cooks. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that lung cancer risks among cooks may be confounded by smoking. After adjustment, cooks did not experience an increased risk of lung cancer overall. The subgroup analyses showing some excess risks among female cooks require cautious interpretation

Lung cancer risk among bakers, pastry cooks and confectionary makers: the SYNERGY study.

International audienceSome studies have suggested increased lung cancer risks among bakers, however the results overall were inconsistent. The authors studied lung cancer risks among bakers and baking-related occupations in the SYNERGY pooled case-control database from 16 countries. Occupation in a baking-related job was identified from the subjects' job histories. ORs adjusted for log(age), study centre, smoking behaviour and ever employment in a job with known exposure to occupational lung carcinogens were calculated by unconditional logistic regression. Findings were stratified by sex, histological subtype of lung cancer and smoking status. 19 366 cases (15 606 men) and 23 670 control subjects (18 528 men) were included. 473 cases (415 men, 58 women) and 501 controls (437 men, 64 women) had ever worked in baking or a related job. We did not observe an increased risk for men in baking (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.18). No linear trends were observed for duration of employment. Some results suggested increased lung cancer risks for women, for example, for working as a baker for >30 years and in never-smokers, but after exclusion of one study these increased risks disappeared. The findings from this study do not suggest increased lung cancer risks in baking-related professions