Mortality from asbestosis and mesothelioma in Britain by birth cohort.

BACKGROUND: Analysis of occupational mortality in England and Wales during 1991-2000 showed no decline in work-attributable deaths from asbestosis. AIMS: To explore why there was no decline in mortality from asbestosis despite stricter controls on asbestos exposure over recent decades. METHODS: Using data from registers of all deaths in Great Britain with mention of mesothelioma or asbestosis on the death certificate, we plotted death rates by 5 year age group within 5 year birth cohorts for(a) mesothelioma and (b) asbestosis without mention of mesothelioma. RESULTS: Analysis was based on a total of 33,751 deaths from mesothelioma and 5396 deaths from asbestosis. For both diseases, mortality showed a clear cohort effect; within birth cohorts, death rates increased progressively with age through to 85 years and older. However, highest mortality from mesothelioma was in men born during 1939-43, whereas, mortality from asbestosis peaked in men born during 1924-38. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that mortality, in Britain, from asbestosis has been determined mainly by cumulative exposure to asbestos before 45 years of age and that the effect of such exposure continues through to old age. That mortality from asbestosis peaked in earlier birth cohorts than mortality from mesothelioma may reflect a difference in exposure-response relationships for the two diseases. The discrepancy could be explained if risk of asbestosis increased more steeply than that of mesothelioma at higher levels of exposure to asbestos and if the highest prevalence of heavy exposure occurred in earlier birth cohorts than the highest prevalence of less intense exposures.

Projection of mesothelioma mortality in Britain using Bayesian methods.

BACKGROUND: Mesothelioma mortality has increased more than ten-fold over the past 40 years in Great Britain, with >1700 male deaths recorded in the British mesothelioma register in 2006. Annual mesothelioma deaths now account for >1% of all cancer deaths. A Poisson regression model based on a previous work by Hodgson et al has been fitted, which has allowed informed statistical inferences about model parameters and predictions of future mesothelioma mortality to be made. METHODS: In the Poisson regression model, the mesothelioma risk of an individual depends on the average collective asbestos dose for the individual in a given year and an age-specific exposure potential. The model has been fitted to the data within a Bayesian framework using the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm, a Markov Chain Monte Carlo technique, providing credible intervals for model parameters as well as prediction intervals for the number of future cases of mortality. RESULTS: Males were most likely to have been exposed to asbestos between the ages of 30 and 49 years, with the peak year of asbestos exposure estimated to be 1963. The estimated number of background cases was 1.08 cases per million population. CONCLUSION: Mortality among males is predicted to peak at approximately 2040 deaths in the year 2016, with a rapid decline thereafter. Approximately 91,000 deaths are predicted to occur from 1968 to 2050 with around 61,000 of these occurring from 2007 onwards.

Mortality among British asbestos workers undergoing regular medical examinations (1971-2005).

OBJECTIVES: The Great Britain Asbestos Survey was established to monitor mortality among workers covered by regulations to control occupational exposure to asbestos. This study updates the estimated burden of asbestos-related mortality in the cohort, and identifies risk factors associated with mortality. METHODS: From 1971, workers were recruited during initially voluntary and later statutory medical examinations. A brief questionnaire was completed during the medical, and participants were flagged for death registrations. Standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) and proportional mortality ratios (PMRs) were calculated for deaths occurring before 2006. Poisson regression analyses were undertaken for diseases with significant excess mortality. RESULTS: There were 15 496 deaths among 98 117 workers followed-up for 1 779 580 person-years. The SMR for all cause mortality was 141 (95% CI 139 to 143) and for all malignant neoplasms 163 (95% CI 159 to 167). The SMRs for cancers of the stomach (166), lung (187), peritoneum (3730) and pleura (968), mesothelioma (513), cerebrovascular disease (164) and asbestosis (5594) were statistically significantly elevated, as were the corresponding PMRs. In age and sex adjusted analysis, birth cohort, age at first exposure, year of first exposure, duration of exposure, latency and job type were associated with the relative risk of lung, pleural and peritoneal cancers, asbestosis and mesothelioma mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Known associations between asbestos exposure and mortality from lung, peritoneal and pleural cancers, mesothelioma and asbestosis were confirmed, and evidence of associations with stroke and stomach cancer mortality was observed. Limited evidence suggested that asbestos-related disease risk may be lower among those first exposed in more recent times.

Occupational, domestic and environmental mesothelioma risks in the British population: a case-control study.

We obtained lifetime occupational and residential histories by telephone interview with 622 mesothelioma patients (512 men, 110 women) and 1420 population controls. Odds ratios (ORs) were converted to lifetime risk (LR) estimates for Britons born in the 1940s. Male ORs (95% confidence interval (CI)) relative to low-risk occupations for >10 years of exposure before the age of 30 years were 50.0 (25.8-96.8) for carpenters (LR 1 in 17), 17.1 (10.3-28.3) for plumbers, electricians and painters, 7.0 (3.2-15.2) for other construction workers, 15.3 (9.0-26.2) for other recognised high-risk occupations and 5.2 (3.1-8.5) in other industries where asbestos may be encountered. The LR was similar in apparently unexposed men and women (approximately 1 in 1000), and this was approximately doubled in exposed workers' relatives (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-3.2). No other environmental hazards were identified. In all, 14% of male and 62% of female cases were not attributable to occupational or domestic asbestos exposure. Approximately half of the male cases were construction workers, and only four had worked for more than 5 years in asbestos product manufacture.

Occupational exposure to asbestos and mortality among asbestos removal workers: a Poisson regression analysis.

The asbestos industry has shifted from manufacture to stripping/removal work. The aim of this study was to investigate early indications of mortality among removal workers. The study population consisted of 31 302 stripping/removal workers in the Great Britain Asbestos Survey, followed up to December 2005. Relative risks (RR) for causes of death with elevated standardised mortality ratios (SMR) and sufficient deaths were obtained from Poisson regression. Risk factors considered included dust suppression technique, type of respirator used, hours spent stripping, smoking status and exposure length. Deaths were elevated for all causes (SMR 123, 95% CI 119-127, n=985), all cancers including lung cancer, mesothelioma, and circulatory disease. There were no significant differences between suppression techniques and respirator types. Spending more than 40 h per week stripping rather than less than 10, increased mortality risk from all causes (RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7), circulatory disease and ischaemic heart disease. Elevated mesothelioma risks were observed for those first exposed at young ages or exposed for more than 30 years. This study is a first step in assessing long-term mortality of asbestos removal workers in relation to working practices and asbestos exposure. Further follow-up will allow the impact of recent regulations to be assessed.

Estimating reduction in occupational disease burden following reduction in exposure.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Many occupational exposures causing disease cannot feasibly be eliminated entirely, but policies that reduce the exposures may be under consideration. This paper sets out to clarify how to estimate the reduction in occupational disease following a reduction in exposure, and shows a real-data illustration for doing this. METHODS: Modest extensions of standard expressions for attributable fractions permit estimation of fractions by which cases would be reduced by policies that do not eliminate exposure but change exposure distributions. However, this requires information on the exposure-response relation and on distribution of exposures. RESULTS: From hypothetical scenarios and a real example this paper explores how attributable cases are distributed by exposure level and, in particular, the proportion by which attributable cancers are reduced by eliminating exposures above a limit (the classic occupational limit regulation). It shows how this depends on the shape of the exposure-response relation and to some extent the shape of the exposure distribution, as well as on the proportion exposed above the limit. For linear no-threshold relations and left-skewed exposure distributions, the majority of the burden may be in a large number of people experiencing small relative risks, and thus may not be tackled by a strategy to reduce exposures above a certain limit. CONCLUSION: With appropriate data, estimating the disease burden in terms of the distribution of exposure is straightforward and can help to clarify the likely outcome of an intervention.

The expected burden of mesothelioma mortality in Great Britain from 2002 to 2050.

The British mesothelioma register contains all deaths from 1968 to 2001 where mesothelioma was mentioned on the death certificate. These data were used to predict the future burden of mesothelioma mortality in Great Britain. Poisson regression analysis was used to model male mesothelioma deaths from 1968 to 2001 as a function of the rise and fall of asbestos exposure during the 20th century, and hence to predict numbers of male deaths in the years 2002-2050. The annual number of mesothelioma deaths in Great Britain has risen increasingly rapidly from 153 deaths in 1968 to 1848 in 2001 and, using our preferred model, is predicted to peak at around 1950 to 2450 deaths per year between 2011 and 2015. Following this peak, the number of deaths is expected to decline rapidly. The eventual death rate will depend on the background level and any residual asbestos exposure. Between 1968 and 2050, there will have been approximately 90,000 deaths from mesothelioma in Great Britain, 65,000 of which will occur after 2001.

The quantitative risks of mesothelioma and lung cancer in relation to asbestos exposure.

Mortality reports on asbestos exposed cohorts which gave information on exposure levels from which (as a minimum) a cohort average cumulative exposure could be estimated were reviewed. At exposure levels seen in occupational cohorts it is concluded that the exposure specific risk of mesothelioma from the three principal commercial asbestos types is broadly in the ratio 1:100:500 for chrysotile, amosite and crocidolite respectively. For lung cancer the conclusions are less clear cut. Cohorts exposed only to crocidolite or amosite record similar exposure specific risk levels (around 5% excess lung cancer per f/ml.yr); but chrysotile exposed cohorts show a less consistent picture, with a clear discrepancy between the mortality experience of a cohort of xhrysotile textile workers in Carolina and the Quebec miners cohort. Taking account of the excess risk recorded by cohorts with mixed fibre exposures (generally<1%), the Carolina experience looks uptypically high. It is suggested that a best estimate lung cancer risk for chrysotile alone would be 0.1%, with a highest reasonable estimate of 0.5%. The risk differential between chrysotile and the two amphibole fibres for lunc cancer is thus between 1:10 and 1:50. Examination of the inter-study dose response relationship for the amphibole fibres suggests a non-linear relationship for all three cancer endpoints (pleural and peritoneal mesotheliomas, and lung cancer). The peritoneal mesothelioma risk is proportional to the square of cumulative exposure, lung cancer risk lies between a linear and square relationship and pleural mesothelioma seems to rise less than linearly with cumulative dose. Although these non-linear relationships provide a best fit ot the data, statistical and other uncertainties mean that a linear relationship remains arguable for pleural and lung tumours (but not or peritoneal tumours). Based on these considerations, and a discussion fo the associated uncertainties, a series of quantified risk summary statements for different elvels of cumulative exposure are presented.