13.02.2013 Views

Air Quality Criteria for Lead Volume II of II - (NEPIS)(EPA) - US ...

Air Quality Criteria for Lead Volume II of II - (NEPIS)(EPA) - US ...

Air Quality Criteria for Lead Volume II of II - (NEPIS)(EPA) - US ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

AX6-202<br />

Table AX6-7.4 (cont’d). Other Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>Lead</strong> Exposure and Cancer<br />

Reference, Study<br />

Location, and Period Study Description Pb Measurement Findings and Interpretation<br />

Europe (cont’d)<br />

Cocco et al. (1997)<br />

Sardinia<br />

1931-1992<br />

Wingren and Axelson<br />

(1987, 1993)<br />

(update <strong>of</strong> Wingren<br />

and Axelson, 1985,<br />

same basic cohort as in<br />

Wingren and<br />

Englander (1990)<br />

Sweden<br />

1950-1982<br />

Cohort design.<br />

1,388 male production and maintenance<br />

workers employed <strong>for</strong> at least 1 yr at a<br />

Sardinian Pb and zinc smelter between<br />

June <strong>of</strong> 1932 and July <strong>of</strong> 1971.<br />

Mortality was followed up through 1992.<br />

Mortality was compared with age- and<br />

calendar-yr-specific regional rates.<br />

Since regional rates were only available<br />

<strong>for</strong> 1965 and later, analyses were limited<br />

to this period.<br />

Case-control design.<br />

Source population: 5,498 men aged<br />

45 or older in 11 Swedish parishes,<br />

including 887 glass workers.<br />

Cancer-specific nested case-control<br />

analysis:<br />

Cases: deaths due to stomach, colon,<br />

and lung cancer from 1950-1982<br />

Controls: deaths due to causes other<br />

than cancer or cardiovascular disease<br />

All workers were considered to<br />

be exposed to Pb.<br />

Glass workers were considered<br />

exposed.<br />

Glassblowers also singled out<br />

as workers with higher<br />

exposure potential.<br />

Job history applied to job<br />

matrix to categorize<br />

occupations as low, moderate,<br />

or high Pb exposure.<br />

SMRs vs. regional rates (95% CI); number <strong>of</strong> deaths<br />

Lung 0.82 (0.56, 1.16); 31<br />

Stomach 0.97 (0.53, 1.62); 14<br />

All cancers 0.93 (0.78, 1.10); 132<br />

Kidney 1.75 (0.48, 4.49); 4<br />

Bladder 1.45 (0.75, 2.53); 12<br />

Brain 2.17 (0.57, 5.57); 4<br />

Kidney cancer showed a significant trend toward increasing risk with<br />

increasing duration <strong>of</strong> exposure<br />

No significant trends were noted <strong>for</strong> lung or other cancers<br />

Brain cancer excess was limited to workers employed <strong>for</strong> 10 yrs or<br />

less.<br />

No control <strong>for</strong> smoking or exposure to arsenic or other smelterrelated<br />

exposures. No data on intensity <strong>of</strong> exposure.<br />

Strong association <strong>of</strong> smelter work with pneumoconiosis and other<br />

respiratory disease (SMR = 4.47, 95% CI: 3.37, 5.80); since this<br />

outcome includes silicosis, which is thought to predispose individuals<br />

to lung cancer, some lung cancer deaths may have been missed due to<br />

misclassification <strong>of</strong> cause <strong>of</strong> death based on death certificates.<br />

OR (90% CI); number <strong>of</strong> deaths<br />

All glass workers:<br />

Lung 1.7 (1.1, 2.5); 86<br />

Stomach 1.5 (1.1, 2.0); 206<br />

Colon 1.6 (1.0, 2.5); 79<br />

Glassblowers:<br />

Lung 2.3<br />

Stomach 2.6<br />

Colon 3.1<br />

Glassblowers singled out from glass workers as a whole thus showed<br />

higher estimated risk. ORs <strong>for</strong> high or moderate vs. low exposure<br />

showed no consistent increase <strong>for</strong> lung or stomach cancer, however,<br />

although they did show mild upward trend <strong>for</strong> colon cancer.<br />

No control <strong>for</strong> smoking or other occupational exposures.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!