8288448 Joint effects of occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium and tobacco smoking on lung cancer risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To provide refined information on joint effects of occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) 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 the SYN-JEM assigning occupational exposure to Cr(VI). Various smoking-related metrics and ever/never occupational exposure to Cr(VI) were investigated in relation to lung cancer risk using unconditional logistic regression. 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% CIs using the delta-method. Results Ever occupational exposure to Cr(VI) occurred in 30% of cases and 23% of controls. Light and moderate smokers (<20 cigarettes/day) showed OR 13.4, CI 11.9–15.1 not exposed to Cr(VI) and OR 17.4, CI 15.2–20.0 with exposure to Cr(VI), with RERI 3.79, CI 2.12–5.47. Heavy smokers (≥20 cigarettes/day) not exposed to Cr(VI) had OR 27.6, CI 24.2–31.6 and with Cr(VI) OR 33.6, CI 28.3–39.9; with RERI 5.72, CI 0.79–10.66. In recent quitters of smoking (1-15 years), the OR was 9.15, CI 8.09–10.4 when not exposed to Cr(VI) and with exposure to Cr(VI) OR 10.8, CI 9.35–12.50 with RERI 1.44, CI 0.20–2.67. After 15 years of smoking cessation, the joint effect was weakened, with a RERI of 0.35, CI -0.16–0.85. Conclusion Occupational Cr(VI) exposure augments smoking-related lung-cancer risk beyond additivity. The RERI remains elevated for up to 15 years after tobacco cessation. These results support integrated control of workplace exposure to Cr(VI) and tobacco control.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".