Dose-time-response association between occupational asbestos exposure and pleural mesothelioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Early occupational exposure to asbestos has been shown to be associated with an increased risk of pleural mesothelioma (PM), which suggests that the timing of exposure might play a role in the dose-response relationship. However, none studies has evaluated the relative impact of increasing the annual intensity of occupational exposure to asbestos at each time of the whole exposure history. Yet such evaluation would allow the comparison of the risks of PM associated with different longitudinal profiles of occupational exposure to asbestos. Our objective was to estimate the time-dependent relative impact of asbestos exposure intensity over the whole occupational history and to compare the resulting estimated risks of PM associated with different profiles of exposure, using data from a large French case-control study. METHODS: This study included 1196 male cases recruited in 1987-2006 and 2369 matched controls on birth year. Occupational exposure to asbestos was assessed using a job exposure matrix and represented in logistic regression models using a flexible weighted cumulative index of exposure. RESULTS: Due to much stronger weights of early doses of asbestos exposure, subjects who accumulated 20 fibres/mL over their entire job history with high doses during the first years and low doses thereafter were at higher risk of PM than those who accumulated most of the doses later (OR=2.37 (95% CI 2.01 to 2.87)). CONCLUSION: This study provides new insights on the dose-time-response relationship between occupational asbestos and PM and illustrates the importance of considering timing of exposure in its association with cancer risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".