Risk analysis for mortality from respiratory tumors in a cohort of refractory ceramic fiber workers.
Risk analysis for mortality from respiratory tumors in a cohort of refractory ceramic fiber workers.
复制标题
耐火陶瓷纤维工人队列中呼吸道肿瘤死亡的风险分析。
DOI：
10.1006/rtph.2001.1513
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Utell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. M. Walker;L. Maxim;M. Utell
虽然耐火陶瓷纤维（RCF）生产设施的工人没有经历肺癌或间皮瘤发病率的升高，但石棉的历史经验以及RCF的动物研究导致了对RCF工人呼吸系统健康的持续研究。我们在一组男性RCF生产工人的累积死亡率经验中比较了肺癌和间皮瘤（Lemasters等人，2001年，提交出版），如果RCF具有与各种形式的石棉相似的致癌潜力，则预期会发生这种变化。为了实现这一点，我们使用了最近由Hodgson和Darnton（2000，Ann. Occup. HYG. 41，13-36）以及Rice及其同事的RCF暴露测量和历史重建（1997，Appl. Occup. Environ. HYG. 12，54-61）。RCF队列中肺癌死亡率在统计学上显著低于RCF具有青石棉或铁石棉效力时的预期死亡率。如果RCF具有温石棉的效力，则死亡率也低于预期的死亡率，但差异在统计学上并不显著。对于间皮瘤，石棉样效力假设下的预期死亡人数太少，无法被RCF队列中看到的零病例所拒绝。目前的流行病学研究并没有排除风险，但他们明确排除了青石棉或铁石棉等肺癌风险。剩余的不确定性证明了正在进行的工作场所监视是合理的。
Although workers in refractory ceramic fibers (RCF) manufacturing facilities have experienced no elevations in lung cancer or mesothelioma rates, the historical experience of asbestos together with animal studies of RCF have led to ongoing studies of the respiratory health of RCF workers. We have compared lung cancer and mesothelioma in the accumulated mortality experience of a cohort of male RCF production workers (Lemasters et al., 2001, submitted for publication) to that which would have been expected if RCF had a carcinogenic potency similar to that of various forms of asbestos. To accomplish this, we used risk models recently formalized by Hodgson and Darnton (2000, Ann. Occup. Hyg. 41, 13-36) for asbestos cohorts together with the RCF exposure measurements and historical reconstructions of Rice and colleagues (1997, Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12, 54-61). Deaths from lung cancer in the RCF cohort are statistically significantly below that which would be expected if RCF had the potency of either crocidolite or amosite. The mortality is also lower than would be expected if RCF had the potency of chrysotile, but the difference is not statistically significant. For mesothelioma, the anticipated numbers of deaths under hypotheses of asbestos-like potency are too small to be rejected by the zero cases seen in the RCF cohorts. The current epidemiologic studies do not rule out risk, but they clearly do rule out lung cancer risks like those of crocidolite or amosite. The residual uncertainty justifies ongoing workplace surveillance.