BACKGROUND: Respirable crystalline silica is a highly prevalent occupational exposure and a recognized lung carcinogen. Most previous studies have focused on selected high-exposure occupational groups. This study examines the relationship between occupational exposure to silica and lung cancer in an occupationally diverse male population. METHODS: Two large population-based case-control studies of lung cancer were conducted in Montreal, one in 1979-1986 (857 cases, 533 population controls, 1,349 cancer controls) and the second in 1996-2001 (738 cases and 899 controls). Interviews provided descriptive lifetime job histories, smoking histories, and other information. Industrial hygienists translated job histories into histories of exposure to a host of occupational substances, including silica. Relative risk was estimated, adjusting for several potential confounders, including smoking. RESULTS: The odds ratio for substantial exposure to silica was 1.67 (95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.31) and for any exposure was 1.31 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.59). Joint effects between silica and smoking were between additive and multiplicative, perhaps closer to the latter. In this population, it is estimated that approximately 3% of lung cancers were attributable to substantial silica exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The carcinogenicity of inhaled crystalline silica was observed in a population with a wide variety of exposure circumstances. IMPACT: The finding of carcinogenicity across a wide range of occupations complements prior studies of specific high-exposure occupations. This suggests that the burden of cancer induced by silica may be much greater than previously thought. Copyright 2010 AACR.
BACKGROUND: Respirable crystalline silica is a highly prevalent occupational exposure and a recognized lung carcinogen. Most previous studies have focused on selected high-exposure occupational groups. This study examines the relationship between occupational exposure to silica and lung cancer in an occupationally diverse male population. METHODS: Two large population-based case-control studies of lung cancer were conducted in Montreal, one in 1979-1986 (857 cases, 533 population controls, 1,349 cancer controls) and the second in 1996-2001 (738 cases and 899 controls). Interviews provided descriptive lifetime job histories, smoking histories, and other information. Industrial hygienists translated job histories into histories of exposure to a host of occupational substances, including silica. Relative risk was estimated, adjusting for several potential confounders, including smoking. RESULTS: The odds ratio for substantial exposure to silica was 1.67 (95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.31) and for any exposure was 1.31 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.59). Joint effects between silica and smoking were between additive and multiplicative, perhaps closer to the latter. In this population, it is estimated that approximately 3% of lung cancers were attributable to substantial silica exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The carcinogenicity of inhaled crystalline silica was observed in a population with a wide variety of exposure circumstances. IMPACT: The finding of carcinogenicity across a wide range of occupations complements prior studies of specific high-exposure occupations. This suggests that the burden of cancer induced by silica may be much greater than previously thought. Copyright 2010 AACR.
Authors: Jean-François Sauvé; Jack Siemiatycki; France Labrèche; Lesley Richardson; Javier Pintos; Marie-Pierre Sylvestre; Michel Gérin; Denis Bégin; Aude Lacourt; Tracy L Kirkham; Thomas Rémen; Romain Pasquet; Mark S Goldberg; Marie-Claude Rousseau; Marie-Élise Parent; Jérôme Lavoué Journal: Ann Work Expo Health Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 2.179
Authors: Sara De Matteis; Dario Consonni; Jay H Lubin; Margaret Tucker; Susan Peters; Roel Ch Vermeulen; Hans Kromhout; Pier Alberto Bertazzi; Neil E Caporaso; Angela C Pesatori; Sholom Wacholder; Maria Teresa Landi Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-03-31 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Calvin Ge; Susan Peters; Ann Olsson; Lützen Portengen; Joachim Schüz; Josué Almansa; Thomas Behrens; Beate Pesch; Benjamin Kendzia; Wolfgang Ahrens; Vladimir Bencko; Simone Benhamou; Paolo Boffetta; Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Neil Caporaso; Dario Consonni; Paul Demers; Eleonóra Fabiánová; Guillermo Fernández-Tardón; John Field; Francesco Forastiere; Lenka Foretova; Pascal Guénel; Per Gustavsson; Vikki Ho; Vladimir Janout; Karl-Heinz Jöckel; Stefan Karrasch; Maria Teresa Landi; Jolanta Lissowska; Danièle Luce; Dana Mates; John McLaughlin; Franco Merletti; Dario Mirabelli; Nils Plato; Hermann Pohlabeln; Lorenzo Richiardi; Peter Rudnai; Jack Siemiatycki; Beata Świątkowska; Adonina Tardón; Heinz-Erich Wichmann; David Zaridze; Thomas Brüning; Kurt Straif; Hans Kromhout; Roel Vermeulen Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: P Wild; M Gonzalez; E Bourgkard; N Courouble; C Clément-Duchêne; Y Martinet; J Févotte; C Paris Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Delphine Lutringer-Magnin; Nicolas Girard; Jacques Cadranel; Caroline Leroux; Elisabeth Quoix; Vincent Cottin; Corinne Del Signore; Marie-Paule Lebitasy; Geneviève Cordier; Philippe Vanhems; Jean-François Mornex Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Aude Lacourt; Javier Pintos; Jérôme Lavoué; Lesley Richardson; Jack Siemiatycki Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-09-22 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Karen M Oude Hengel; Erik van Deurssen; Tim Meijster; Erik Tielemans; Dick Heederik; Anjoeka Pronk Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-07-28 Impact factor: 3.295