Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Chrysotile, tremolite and fibrogenicity.

Authors: J C, McDonald; A D, McDonald; J M, Hughes;

Chrysotile, tremolite and fibrogenicity.

Abstract

Recently published analyses have shown that the risks of mesothelioma and lung cancer in Quebec chrysotile miners and millers were related to estimated level of fibrous tremolite in the mines where they had worked. An analysis has therefore been made of radiographic changes in men who in 1965 were employed by companies in Thetford Mines where the same question could be examined for fibrogenicity. Of 294 men who met the necessary requirements, 129 had worked in six centrally located mines, where the tremolite content was thought to be high, 81 in 10 peripheral mines where it was thought to be low and 84 in both. The median prevalence of small parenchymal opacities (> or = 1/0) in chest radiographs read by six readers was higher among men ever than never employed in the central mines (13.6% against 7.4%), despite the fact that the mean cumulative exposure was lower in the former (430 mpcf.y vs 520 mpcf.y). After accounting by logistic regression for cigarette smoking, age, smoking-age interaction and cumulative exposure, the adjusted odds ratio for central mine employment was 2.44 (95% lower bound: 1.06). Together with other surveys of asbestos miners and millers, this study suggests that amphibole fibres, including tremolite, are more fibrogenic than chrysotile, perhaps to the same extent that they are carcinogenic, though the data available were not sufficient to address the latter question.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Male, Mesothelioma, Lung Neoplasms, Asbestos, Serpentine, Asbestos, Amphibole, Middle Aged, Risk Assessment, Mining, Cohort Studies, Occupational Exposure, Odds Ratio, Humans, Radiography, Thoracic, Lung, Occupational Health, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    23
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
23
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!