Literature DB >> 8704856

Compensating lung cancer patients occupationally exposed to coal tar pitch volatiles.

B Armstrong1, G Thériault.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the process of deciding on compensation claims by lung cancer patients exposed occupationally to coal tar pitch volatiles.
METHODS: For each case of lung cancer the probability that it was caused (probability of causation (PC)) by coal tar pitch volatiles was expressed as an increasing function of cumulative exposure to benzo-a-pyrene-years. This was assessed from several exposure-response models fitted to data from a large epidemiological study of aluminum production workers. For some models, PC depended also on the smoking habit of the cancer patient.
RESULTS: Estimation of relative risk by exposure group indicated that over 50% of lung cancers were attributable to coal tar pitch volatiles (PC > 50%) at exposures above 100 micrograms/m3-years benzo(a)pyrene. A linear relative risk model indicated that 50% PC was first achieved at 342.2 micrograms/m3-years benzo(a)pyrene, or 190.1 micrograms/m3-years benzo(a)pyrene according to the upper 95% confidence limit for risk increment. Corresponding figures for a power curve model were 210.3 and 45.9. With these five figures as compensation criteria compensation would have resulted in 31.4%, 2.7%, 19.2%, 15.7%, and 39.2% of cancers studied, compared with an estimated total proportion of cancers studied attributable to coal tar pitch volatiles of 15%-26%. If risks due to coal tar pitch volatiles and smoking multiply, PC does not depend on the amount smoked. If the two risks are additive, however, PC depends on the amount smoked according to a formula, with the figures mentioned applying to an average smoking history (24.4 pack-years).
CONCLUSION: Because of its simplicity and because it falls within the range of criteria based on several more sophisticated approaches, we prefer the criterion of 100 micrograms/m3-years, based on the relative risks by exposure group. However, the compensation board of the Canadian province of Quebec, on consideration of these alternatives, has proposed as a criterion that the upper 95% confidence limit of PC for the patient be at least 50%, assuming an additive relative risk model and allowing for their smoking habit.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8704856      PMCID: PMC1128438          DOI: 10.1136/oem.53.3.160

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Occup Environ Med        ISSN: 1351-0711            Impact factor:   4.402


  13 in total

1.  Estimability and estimation of expected years of life lost due to a hazardous exposure.

Authors:  J Robins; S Greenland
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The probability of causation under a stochastic model for individual risk.

Authors:  J Robins; S Greenland
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Legal and scientific probability of causation of cancer and other environmental disease in individuals.

Authors:  T A Brennan; R F Carter
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 2.265

4.  Evaluation for compensation of asbestos-exposed individuals. II. Apportionment of risk for lung cancer and mesothelioma.

Authors:  G R Chase; P Kotin; K Crump; R S Mitchell
Journal:  J Occup Med       Date:  1985-03

5.  Challenges to epidemiology in the next decade.

Authors:  L Gordis
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Compensating bladder cancer victims employed in aluminum reduction plants.

Authors:  B Armstrong; C Tremblay; G Theriault
Journal:  J Occup Med       Date:  1988-10

7.  The cancer risk attributable to radiation exposure: some practical problems.

Authors:  V P Bond
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 1.316

8.  Assigned shares in compensation for radiation-related cancers.

Authors:  S W Lagakos; F Mosteller
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 4.000

Review 9.  Epidemiologic evidence of cancer in aluminum reduction plant workers.

Authors:  A Rönneberg; F Langmark
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.214

10.  Are the apparent effects of cigarette smoking on lung and bladder cancers due to uncontrolled confounding by occupational exposures?

Authors:  J Siemiatycki; R Dewar; D Krewski; M Désy; L Richardson; E Franco
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 4.822

View more
  9 in total

1.  Relation of probability of causation to relative risk and doubling dose: a methodologic error that has become a social problem.

Authors:  S Greenland
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Estimating the proportion of cases of lung cancer legally attributable to smoking: a novel approach for class actions against the tobacco industry.

Authors:  Jack Siemiatycki; Igor Karp; Marie-Pierre Sylvestre; Javier Pintos
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2014-06-12       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Shift work and cancer: the evidence and the challenge.

Authors:  Thomas C Erren; Puran Falaturi; Peter Morfeld; Peter Knauth; Russel J Reiter; Claus Piekarski
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 4.  Comparison of toxicogenomics and traditional approaches to inform mode of action and points of departure in human health risk assessment of benzo[a]pyrene in drinking water.

Authors:  Ivy Moffat; Nikolai Chepelev; Sarah Labib; Julie Bourdon-Lacombe; Byron Kuo; Julie K Buick; France Lemieux; Andrew Williams; Sabina Halappanavar; Amal Malik; Mirjam Luijten; Jiri Aubrecht; Daniel R Hyduke; Albert J Fornace; Carol D Swartz; Leslie Recio; Carole L Yauk
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 5.635

5.  Intestinal polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-DNA adducts in a population of beluga whales with high levels of gastrointestinal cancers.

Authors:  Miriam C Poirier; Stéphane Lair; Robert Michaud; Elena E Hernández-Ramon; Kathyayini V Divi; Jennifer E Dwyer; Corbin D Ester; Nancy N Si; Mehnaz Ali; Lisa L Loseto; Stephen A Raverty; Judith A St Leger; William G Van Bonn; Kathleen Colegrove; Kathleen A Burek-Huntington; Robert Suydam; Raphaela Stimmelmayr; John Pierce Wise; Sandra S Wise; Guy Beauchamp; Daniel Martineau
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 3.216

Review 6.  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and cancer in man.

Authors:  G Mastrangelo; E Fadda; V Marzia
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 9.031

7.  Years of Life Lost due to exposure: Causal concepts and empirical shortcomings.

Authors:  P Morfeld
Journal:  Epidemiol Perspect Innov       Date:  2004-12-16

Review 8.  Cancer risks in aluminum reduction plant workers: a review.

Authors:  Graham W Gibbs; France Labrèche
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.162

Review 9.  Asbestos, Smoking and Lung Cancer: An Update.

Authors:  Sonja Klebe; James Leigh; Douglas W Henderson; Markku Nurminen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.390

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.