O-135 Exploring the etiology of rare cancers using a large multi-ore mining cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Introduction</h3> Cohort studies may be limited in their ability to investigate rare cancers because of their size, length of follow-up, or access to cancer registry data. This study examines exposure patterns for nasal, nasopharyngeal, laryngeal, salivary gland, and bone cancer using a large multi-ore mining cohort. <h3>Materials & Methods</h3> From 1928–1988 underground miners in Ontario, a region where gold, uranium, nickel, and other ores are mined, were required to undergo an annual medical exam, and record their mining work history to receive certification. These data were used to create the Mining Master File (MMF) cohort. Cancers were identified through linkage with the Ontario Cancer Registry (1964–2017). Cancer risk among miners was compared to the general population using Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIR) and between groups of miners in the cohort using Poisson regression. <h3>Results</h3> The cohort consisted of 61,397 male miners. Nasal cancer was somewhat elevated (48 cases, SIR=1.44, 95% confidence Interval (CI)=1.06–1.91) but the observed excess was largely localized to miners who had the majority of employment in nickel mines (SIR=2.09, CI=1.37–3.06). Nasopharyngeal cancer was similarly elevated (44 cases, SIR=1.42, CI=1.03–1.91) but in contrast the excess risk was limited to gold mining (SIR=2.70, CI=1.57–4.33). A small elevation was observed for larynx cancer (307 cases, SIR=1.26, CI=1.12–1.40), but was not limited to one ore type. Bone cancer was clearly elevated (58 cases, SIR=1.91, CI=1.45–2.47), with ore-specific elevations seen among uranium (SIR=2.46, CI=1.22–4.40) followed by nickel mining (SIR=2.04, CI=1.29–3.06). Salivary gland was only slightly elevated (54 cases, SIR=1.09, CI=0.82–1.42), but the risk among uranium miners exposed to radon was high (SIR=2.97, CI=1.81–4.59) and increased monotonically with employment duration. <h3>Conclusion</h3> This analysis demonstrated the power of this cohort to identify associations for rare cancers. Although the association of nickel with nasal cancer was expected, some other associations were surprising and warrant further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".