8287191 Joint effects of occupational exposure to asbestos or respirable crystalline silica and tobacco smoking on lung cancer risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore joint effects of occupational exposure to asbestos and respirable crystalline silica (RCS) and smoking on lung-cancer risk. Material and Methods This analysis in men included 13,605 lung-cancer cases and 16,451 controls from 14 European and Canadian case-control studies. Job histories were linked to SYN-JEM to assign occupational exposure to asbestos and RCS. Various metrics of smoking and occupational exposure to asbestos and RCS were investigated in relation to lung cancer risk using unconditional logistic regression models. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adjusted for study centre, age group, and ‘recognized high-risk occupations’. Joint effects were evaluated on the additive scale by calculating the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) and corresponding 95% CI using the delta-method. Results Occupational cumulative exposure to asbestos median have a RERI: 1.67, CI 1.06 to 2.29. Cumulative asbestos exposure results in positive RERIs, whether median (RERI: 3.70, CI 2.31 to 5.08), with cumulative smoking >20py. Occupational cumulative exposure to RCS median. When RCS median with smoking >20py. Conclusion Occupational exposure to RCS and smoking confers an excess lung-cancer risk beyond additivity even at cumulative exposure levels below median and light smoking. Occupational exposure to asbestos and smoking shows a similar pattern, except a small RERI at cumulative exposure to asbestos below median and light smoking. These findings emphasize the need for proactive control of occupational exposures and prevention of tobacco smoking.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".