Diesel exhaust and lung cancer mortality in potash mining

Säverin, Robert; Bräunlich, A; Dahmann, D.; Enderlein, G.; Heuchert, G

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199910)36:4<415::aid-ajim2>3.3.co;2-h

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The recent Neumeyer-Gromen et al (2009) updated analysis of a cohort of 5800 German potash miners is one of the better-conducted studies of the relationship between DE exposure and lung cancer in underground miners. This study is considered to represent a significant improvement over the prior Säverin et al (1999) analysis for this cohort, due to longer follow-up, the use of more stable statistical models, and adjustment for smoking ( Gamble, 2010 ). As summarized in Table 4 , this study reported a significantly decreased lung cancer SMR of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.57-0.93), but elevated, although imprecise, RRs for internal comparisons where DE exposure was dichotomized - e.g.…”

Section: State Of the Knowledge Regarding De Carcinogenic Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health effects research and regulation of diesel exhaust: an historical overview focused on lung cancer risk

Hesterberg

Long

Bunn

et al. 2012

Inhalation Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mutagenicity of organic solvent extracts from diesel exhaust particulate (DEP), first noted more than 55 years ago, initiated an avalanche of diesel exhaust (DE) health effects research that now totals more than 6000 published studies. Despite an extensive body of results, scientific debate continues regarding the nature of the lung cancer risk posed by inhalation of occupational and environmental DE, with much of the debate focused on DEP. Decades of scientific scrutiny and increasingly stringent regulation have resulted in major advances in diesel engine technologies. The changed particulate matter (PM) emissions in “New Technology Diesel Exhaust (NTDE)” from today's modern low-emission, advanced-technology on-road heavy-duty diesel engines now resemble the PM emissions in contemporary gasoline engine exhaust (GEE) and compressed natural gas engine exhaust more than those in the “traditional diesel exhaust” (TDE) characteristic of older diesel engines. Even with the continued publication of epidemiologic analyses of TDE-exposed populations, this database remains characterized by findings of small increased lung cancer risks and inconsistent evidence of exposure-response trends, both within occupational cohorts and across occupational groups considered to have markedly different exposures (e.g. truckers versus railroad shopworkers versus underground miners). The recently published National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-National Cancer Institute (NCI) epidemiologic studies of miners provide some of the strongest findings to date regarding a DE-lung cancer association, but some inconsistent exposure-response findings and possible effects of bias and exposure misclassification raise questions regarding their interpretation. Laboratory animal studies are negative for lung tumors in all species, except for rats under lifetime TDE-exposure conditions with durations and concentrations that lead to'lung overload."The species specificity of the rat lung response to overload, and its occurrence with other particle types, is now well-understood. It is thus generally accepted that the rat bioassay for inhaled particles under conditions of lung overload is not predictive of human lung cancer hazard. Overall, despite an abundance of epidemiologic and experimental data, there remain questions as to whether TDE exposure causes increased lung cancers in humans. An abundance of emissions characterization data, as well as preliminary toxicological data, support NTDE as being toxicologically distinct from TDE. Currently, neither epidemiologic data nor animal bioassay data yet exist that directly bear on NTDE carcinogenic potential. A chronic bioassay of NTDE currently in progress will provide data on whether NTDE poses a carcinogenic hazard, but based on the significant reductions in PM mass emissions and the major changes in PM composition, it has been hypothesized that NTDE has a low carcinogenic potential. When the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reevaluates DE (along with GEE and ni...

show abstract

Section: State Of the Knowledge Regarding De Carcinogenic Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health effects research and regulation of diesel exhaust: an historical overview focused on lung cancer risk

Hesterberg

Long

Bunn

et al. 2012

Inhalation Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cohort studies using an internal reference group and case–control studies might result in a less biased estimate. Not surprisingly, the early cohort studies that use an external reference group show only equivocal evidence, 11–17 while the majority of the cohort studies using an internal comparison group 10,18–24 and almost all case–control studies 20,25–41 conducted within the last 25 years show an increased lung cancer risk in DE‐exposed workers with an elevation of risk between 20% and 50% ( 1 and 2).…”

Section: Health Effects Of Diesel Exhaustmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 One study that incorporates personal exposure measurements and area measurements of total carbon as a surrogate for DE exposure is a cohort mortality study conducted in 5536 male potash miners in Germany. 10 Exposure was assessed from concentration measurements of total carbon in personal dust samples and multiplied by years of exposure to give a quantitative exposure measure. After a cumulative exposure of 4.9 years × mg/m 3 , corresponding to 20 years of exposure in the highest exposure category, a relative risk (RR) for lung cancer of 1.7 (0.5-5.8) was found.…”

Section: Epidemiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Diesel Exhaust and Coal Mine Dust

Hoffmann

Jöckel

2006

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflicting evidence on the carcinogenicity of diesel exhaust (DE) and coal mine dust in occupational settings exist. Exposure measurement in most studies is inferred on the basis of job classifications and may lead to misclassification. Confounding behavioral factors (i.e., smoking) and occupational risk factors (exposure to asbestos, arsenic, radon) need to be considered. We evaluated the epidemiological evidence and current findings of the carcinogenicity of DE and coal mine dust in occupational settings. Pertaining literature was identified through Medline search and recent review articles. Strengths and limitations of recent approaches are discussed. Many epidemiological studies have addressed the question of carcinogenicity in workers exposed to DE, and most showed a low-to-medium increase in the risk of bronchial carcinoma. The pooled relative risk (RR) estimates lie between 1.33 and 1.47, and a consistent rise in risk across various job categories and study designs point to a causal relationship. Data on the carcinogenicity of coal mine dust are less consistent and the potential for confounding by unmeasured risk factors (arsenic, radon, DE) are higher. While silica as one of its components has been evaluated as carcinogenic, there is inadequate evidence for the carcinogenicity of pure coal dust according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). There is sufficient evidence for a causal relationship between DE and lung cancer in occupational settings. The evidence for coal mine dust is less convincing, but individual studies show an increase in risk of lung cancer in exposed workers.

show abstract

“…Two were cohort mortality studies of coal miners and potash miners with internal analyses comparing exposed to nonexposed miners. 17,18 The third study was a case-control study of truck drivers. 15 ACRs were generally near 1.0 for all mortality outcomes, so the ACRs and ratios of coefficients are similar to the results for tobacco smoke.…”

Section: Diesel Exhaust Diesel Exhaust Concentrations In the Losmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Ambient PM Risk with Risks Estimated from PM Components of Smoking and Occupational Exposures

Gamble

Nicolich

2000

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Air pollution studies are based on individual-level health response data and group-level exposure data. Therefore, exposure misclassification occurs, and the results may be biased to an unknown magnitude and direction. Testing the validity of such associations requires a study design using individual-level data for both exposure and response. One can test the plausibility of group-level PM risk estimates by comparing them to individual-level estimates of risk from constituents of ambient air. The twofold purpose of this review is to consider the internal consistency of risks estimated from the three major PM cohort studies and to determine individual-level mortality risks associated with ambient concentrations of tobacco smoke and occupational exposures and compare them with risks associated with ambient PM.The paper demonstrates the risks are not consistent within and between the PM cohort studies. Higher ambient concentration risks (ACRs) from the ambient PM cohort studies are not coherent with ACRs derived from individual-level smoking and occupational risks for total, cardiopulmonary, and lung cancer mortality. Individuallevel studies suggest increased risk of mortality cannot be measured with reliability at concentrations found in ambient air.

show abstract

Diesel exhaust and lung cancer mortality in potash mining

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Health effects research and regulation of diesel exhaust: an historical overview focused on lung cancer risk

Health effects research and regulation of diesel exhaust: an historical overview focused on lung cancer risk

Diesel Exhaust and Coal Mine Dust

Comparison of Ambient PM Risk with Risks Estimated from PM Components of Smoking and Occupational Exposures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About