A Historical Survey of Key Epidemiological Studies of Ionizing Radiation Exposure.

In this article we review the history of key epidemiological studies of populations exposed to ionizing radiation. We highlight historical and recent findings regarding radiation-associated risks for incidence and mortality of cancer and non-cancer outcomes with emphasis on study design and methods of exposure assessment and dose estimation along with brief consideration of sources of bias for a few of the more important studies. We examine the findings from the epidemiological studies of the Japanese atomic bomb survivors, persons exposed to radiation for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes, those exposed to environmental sources including Chornobyl and other reactor accidents, and occupationally exposed cohorts. We also summarize results of pooled studies. These summaries are necessarily brief, but we provide references to more detailed information. We discuss possible future directions of study, to include assessment of susceptible populations, and possible new populations, data sources, study designs and methods of analysis.

Cancer mortality after low dose exposure to ionising radiation in workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS): cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of protracted low dose, low dose rate exposure to ionising radiation on the risk of cancer. DESIGN: Multinational cohort study. SETTING: Cohorts of workers in the nuclear industry in France, the UK, and the US included in a major update to the International Nuclear Workers Study (INWORKS). PARTICIPANTS: 309 932 workers with individual monitoring data for external exposure to ionising radiation and a total follow-up of 10.7 million person years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimates of excess relative rate per gray (Gy) of radiation dose for mortality from cancer. RESULTS: The study included 103 553 deaths, of which 28 089 were due to solid cancers. The estimated rate of mortality due to solid cancer increased with cumulative dose by 52% (90% confidence interval 27% to 77%) per Gy, lagged by 10 years. Restricting the analysis to the low cumulative dose range (0-100 mGy) approximately doubled the estimate of association (and increased the width of its confidence interval), as did restricting the analysis to workers hired in the more recent years of operations when estimates of occupational external penetrating radiation dose were recorded more accurately. Exclusion of deaths from lung cancer and pleural cancer had a modest effect on the estimated magnitude of association, providing indirect evidence that the association was not substantially confounded by smoking or occupational exposure to asbestos. CONCLUSIONS: This major update to INWORKS provides a direct estimate of the association between protracted low dose exposure to ionising radiation and solid cancer mortality based on some of the world's most informative cohorts of radiation workers. The summary estimate of excess relative rate solid cancer mortality per Gy is larger than estimates currently informing radiation protection, and some evidence suggests a steeper slope for the dose-response association in the low dose range than over the full dose range. These results can help to strengthen radiation protection, especially for low dose exposures that are of primary interest in contemporary medical, occupational, and environmental settings.

Firefighting and Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies in the Context of Cancer Hazard Identification.

Objective: We performed a meta-analysis of epidemiological results for the association between occupational exposure as a firefighter and cancer as part of the broader evidence synthesis work of the IARCMonographs program. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify cohort studies of firefighters followed for cancer incidence and mortality. Studies were evaluated for the influence of key biases on results. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to estimate the association between ever-employment and duration of employment as a firefighter and risk of 12 selected cancers. The impact of bias was explored in sensitivity analyses. Results: Among the 16 included cancer incidence studies, the estimated meta-rate ratio, 95% confidence interval (CI), and heterogeneity statistic (I2) for ever-employment as a career firefighter compared mostly to general populations were 1.58 (1.14-2.20, 8%) for mesothelioma, 1.16 (1.08-1.26, 0%) for bladder cancer, 1.21 (1.12-1.32, 81%) for prostate cancer, 1.37 (1.03-1.82, 56%) for testicular cancer, 1.19 (1.07-1.32, 37%) for colon cancer, 1.36 (1.15-1.62, 83%) for melanoma, 1.12 (1.01-1.25, 0%) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, 1.28 (1.02-1.61, 40%) for thyroid cancer, and 1.09 (0.92-1.29, 55%) for kidney cancer. Ever-employment as a firefighter was not positively associated with lung, nervous system, or stomach cancer. Results for mesothelioma and bladder cancer exhibited low heterogeneity and were largely robust across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: There is epidemiological evidence to support a causal relationship between occupational exposure as a firefighter and certain cancers. Challenges persist in the body of evidence related to the quality of exposure assessment, confounding, and medical surveillance bias.

Ionizing radiation and solid cancer mortality among US nuclear facility workers.

BACKGROUND: The risk of solid cancers from low-level protracted ionizing radiation is not well characterized. Nuclear workers provide valuable information on the effects of ionizing radiation in contemporary exposure scenarios relevant to workers and the public. METHODS: We evaluated the association between penetrating ionizing radiation exposure and solid cancer mortality among a pooled cohort of nuclear workers in the USA, with extended follow-up to examine cancers with long latencies. This analysis includes 101 363 workers from five nuclear facilities, with 12 069 solid cancer deaths between 1944 and 2016. The association between cumulative equivalent dose measured in sieverts (Sv) and solid cancer subtypes were modelled as the excess relative rate per Sv (ERR Sv-1) using Cox regression. RESULTS: For the association between ionizing radiation exposure and all solid cancer mortality we observed an elevated rate (ERR Sv-1=0.19; 95% CI: -0.10, 0.52), which was higher among a contemporary sub-cohort of workers first hired in 1960 or later (ERR Sv-1= 2.23; 95% CI: 1.13, 3.49). Similarly, we observed an elevated rate for lung cancer mortality (ERR Sv-1= 0.65; 95% CI: 0.09, 1.30) that was higher among contemporary hires (ERR Sv-1= 2.90; 95% CI: 1.00, 5.26). CONCLUSIONS: Although concerns remain about confounding, measurement error and precision, this analysis strengthens the evidence base indicating there are radiogenic risks for several solid cancer types.

All-cause and cause-specific mortality in a cohort of WTC-exposed and non-WTC-exposed firefighters.

OBJECTIVE: To compare mortality rates in World Trade Center (WTC)-exposed Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY) firefighters with rates in similarly healthy, non-WTC-exposed/non-FDNY firefighters, and compare mortality in each firefighter cohort with the general population. METHODS: 10 786 male WTC-exposed FDNY firefighters and 8813 male non-WTC-exposed firefighters from other urban fire departments who were employed on 11 September 2001 were included in the analyses. Only WTC-exposed firefighters received health monitoring via the WTC Health Programme (WTCHP). Follow-up began 11 September 2001 and ended at the earlier of death date or 31 December 2016. Death data were obtained from the National Death Index and demographics from the fire departments. We estimated standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) in each firefighter cohort versus US males using demographic-specific US mortality rates. Poisson regression models estimated relative rates (RRs) of all-cause and cause-specific mortality in WTC-exposed versus non-WTC-exposed firefighters, controlling for age and race. RESULTS: Between 11 September 2001 and 31 December 2016, there were 261 deaths among WTC-exposed firefighters and 605 among non-WTC-exposed. Both cohorts had reduced all-cause mortality compared with US males (SMR (95% CI)=0.30 (0.26 to 0.34) and 0.60 (0.55 to 0.65) in WTC-exposed and non-WTC-exposed, respectively). WTC-exposed firefighters also had lower rates of all-cause mortality (RR=0.54, 95% CI=0.49 to 0.59) and cancer-specific, cardiovascular-specific and respiratory disease-specific mortality compared with non-WTC-exposed firefighters. CONCLUSION: Both firefighter cohorts had lower than expected all-cause mortality. Fifteen years post 11 September 2001, mortality was lower in WTC-exposed versus non-WTC-exposed firefighters. Lower mortality in the WTC-exposed suggests not just a healthy worker effect, but additional factors such as greater access to free health monitoring and treatment that they receive via the WTCHP.

Scientific Value of the Sub-Cohort of Children in the World Trade Center Health Registry.

The World Trade Center Health Registry (WTCHR) was established in 2002 as a public health resource to monitor the health effects from the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster. We evaluated the representativeness of the WTC youth population (<18 years on 11 September 2001) by comparing the distributions of age, gender, race/ethnic groups, and income to 2000 census data for the matched geographic area, including distance from disaster. There were 2379 WTCHR enrolled children living in Lower Manhattan south of Canal Street on 11 September 2001, along with 752 enrolled students who attended school in Lower Manhattan but were not area residents. The WTCHR sub-group of children who were residents was similar to the geographically corresponding census population on age and sex. Black and Hispanic children are moderately overrepresented at 0.9% and 2.4% in the WTCHR compared to 0.8% and 1.7% in census population, respectively, while lower-income households are slightly under-represented, 28.8% in the WTCHR and 30.8% for the corresponding census information. Asian children appear underrepresented at 3.0% participation compared to 6.3% in the census. While the demographics of WTCHR youth are somewhat skewed, the gaps are within expected patterns of under-representation observed in other longitudinal cohorts and can be effectively addressed analytically or through targeted study design.

End-stage renal disease incidence in a cohort of US firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia.

BACKGROUND: Firefighters perform strenuous work in hot environments, which may increase their risk of chronic kidney disease. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and types of ESRD among a cohort of US firefighters compared to the US general population, and to examine exposure-response relationships. METHODS: ESRD from 1977 through 2014 was identified through linkage with Medicare data. ESRD incidence in the cohort compared to the US population was evaluated using life table analyses. Associations of all ESRD, systemic ESRD, hypertensive ESRD, and diabetic ESRD with exposure surrogates (exposed days, fire runs, and fire hours) were examined in Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for attained age (the time scale), race, birth date, fire department, and employment duration. RESULTS: The incidence of all ESRD was less than expected (standardized incidence ratio (SIR) = 0.79; 95% confidence interval = 0.69-0.89, observed = 247). SIRs for ESRD types were not significantly increased. Positive associations of all ESRD, systemic ESRD, and hypertensive ESRD with exposed days were observed: however, 95% confidence intervals included one. CONCLUSIONS: We found little evidence of increased risk of ESRD among this cohort of firefighters. Limitations included the inability to evaluate exposure-response relationships for some ESRD types due to small observed numbers, the limitations of the surrogates of exposure, and the lack of information on more sensitive outcome measures for potential kidney effects.

Nonmalignant respiratory disease mortality in male Colorado Plateau uranium miners, 1960-2016.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate trends of nonmalignant respiratory disease (NMRD) mortality among US underground uranium miners on the Colorado Plateau, and to estimate the exposure-response association between cumulative radon progeny exposure and NMRD subtype mortality. METHODS: Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and excess relative rates per 100 working level months (excess relative rate [ERR]/100 WLM) were estimated in a cohort of 4021 male underground uranium miners who were followed from 1960 through 2016. RESULTS: We observed elevated SMRs for all NMRD subtypes. Silicosis had the largest SMR (n = 52, SMR = 41.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 30.9, 54.3), followed by other pneumoconiosis (n = 49, SMR = 39.6; 95% CI: 29.6, 52.3) and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (n = 64, SMR = 4.77; 95% CI 3.67, 6.09). SMRs for silicosis increased with duration of employment; SMRs for IPF increased with duration of employment and calendar period. There was a positive association between cumulative radon exposure and silicosis with evidence of modification by smoking (ERR/100 WLM≥10 pack-years = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.05, 24.6 and ERR/100 WLM<10 pack-years = 0.01; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.52), as well as a small positive association between radon and IPF (ERR/100 WLM = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.24); these associations were driven by workers with prior employment in hard rock mining. CONCLUSIONS: Uranium mining workers had excess NMRD mortality compared with the general population; this excess persisted throughout follow-up. Exposure-response analyses indicated a positive association between radon exposure and IPF and silicosis, but these analyses have limitations due to outcome misclassification and missing information on occupational co-exposures such as silica dust.

The World Trade Center Health Program: Twenty years of health effects research.

It has been 20 years since the devastating terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Thousands were injured or killed during the attacks and many more are at risk of adverse health stemming from physical, psychological, and emotional stressors born out of the attacks. Private, federal, state, and local resources were gathered soon after the attacks to address impacts to the community, including the health and well-being of both responders and survivors. Many of these efforts are now largely consolidated under the federally mandated World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program. This program provides medical monitoring and treatment of qualifying conditions among the 9/11-exposed population and supports related physical and mental health research. In this commentary, we describe the WTC Health Program, with emphasis on the health-effects research it has funded since inception in 2011. We describe sentinel research publications, and how science has impacted the program. We provide examples relating studies in this special issue to important roles in the WTC Health Program research agenda. Finally, we provide a perspective on future research needs.

Cancer incidence in World Trade Center-exposed and non-exposed male firefighters, as compared with the US adult male population: 2001-2016.

OBJECTIVE: To compare cancer incidence in Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY) firefighters who worked at the World Trade Center (WTC) site to incidence in a population of non-WTC-exposed firefighters, the Career Firefighter Health Study (CFHS) cohort, and to compare rates from each firefighter cohort to rates in demographically similar US males. METHODS: FDNY (N=10 786) and CFHS (N=8813) cohorts included male firefighters who were active on 11 September 2001 (9/11) and were followed until death or 31 December 2016. Cases were identified from 15 state cancer registries. Poisson regression models assessed cancers in each group (FDNY and CFHS) versus US males, and associations between group and cancer rates; these models estimated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) and adjusted relative rates (RRs), respectively. Secondary analyses assessed surveillance bias and smoking history. RESULTS: We identified 915 cancer cases in 841 FDNY firefighters and 1002 cases in 909 CFHS firefighters. FDNY had: higher rates for all cancers (RR=1.13; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25), prostate (RR=1.39; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.63) and thyroid cancer (RR=2.53; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.70); younger median ages at diagnosis (55.6 vs 59.4; p<0.001, all cancers); and more cases with localised disease when compared with CFHS. Compared with US males, both firefighter cohorts had elevated SIRs for prostate cancer and melanoma. Control for surveillance bias in FDNY reduced most differences. CONCLUSIONS: Excess cancers occurred in WTC-exposed firefighters relative to each comparison group, which may partially be explained by heightened surveillance. Two decades post-9/11, clearer understanding of WTC-related risk requires extended follow-up and modelling studies (laboratory or animal based) to identify workplace exposures in all firefighters.

The World Trade Center Health Program: Petitions for adding qualifying health conditions.

The federally mandated World Trade Center Health Program provides limited health benefits for qualifying health conditions related to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A qualifying health condition is an illness or health condition for which the member's exposure to airborne toxins, any other hazard, or any other adverse condition resulting from the 9/11 terrorist attacks is considered substantially likely to be a significant factor in aggravating, contributing to, or causing the illness or health condition. These qualifying health conditions are listed in federal regulations. The regulations also provide a process for amending this list. This commentary describes the methods developed for adding health conditions to the list of qualifying health conditions and discusses changes to the list that have occurred during the Program's 2011-2020 period.

Lung Cancer Mortality and Styrene Exposure in the Reinforced-Plastics Boatbuilding Industry: Evaluation of Healthy Worker Survivor Bias.

The evidence for styrene's being a human lung carcinogen has been inconclusive. Occupational cohorts within the reinforced-plastics industry are an ideal population in which to study this association because of their relatively high levels of exposure to styrene and lack of concomitant exposures to other known carcinogens. However, healthy worker survivor bias (HWSB), where healthier workers stay employed longer and thus have higher exposure potential, is a likely source of confounding bias for exposure-response associations, in part due to styrene's acute effects. Through December 31, 2016, we studied a cohort of 5,163 boatbuilders exposed to styrene in Washington State who were employed between 1959 and 1978; prior regression analyses had demonstrated little evidence for an exposure-response relationship between styrene exposure and lung cancer mortality. Based on estimates of necessary components of HWSB, we found evidence for a potentially large HWSB. Using g-estimation of a structural nested model to account for HWSB, we estimated that 1 year of styrene exposure at more than 30 parts per million accelerated time to lung cancer death by 2.29 years (95% confidence interval: 1.53, 2.94). Our results suggest possibly strong HWSB in our small cohort and indicate that large, influential studies of styrene-exposed workers may suffer from similar biases, warranting a reassessment of the evidence of long-term health effects of styrene exposure.

Risk of cancer associated with low-dose radiation exposure: comparison of results between the INWORKS nuclear workers study and the A-bomb survivors study.

The Life Span Study (LSS) of Japanese atomic bomb survivors has served as the primary basis for estimates of radiation-related disease risks that inform radiation protection standards. The long-term follow-up of radiation-monitored nuclear workers provides estimates of radiation-cancer associations that complement findings from the LSS. Here, a comparison of radiation-cancer mortality risk estimates derived from the LSS and INWORKS, a large international nuclear worker study, is presented. Restrictions were made, so that the two study populations were similar with respect to ages and periods of exposure, leading to selection of 45,625 A-bomb survivors and 259,350 nuclear workers. For solid cancer, excess relative rates (ERR) per gray (Gy) were 0.28 (90% CI 0.18; 0.38) in the LSS, and 0.29 (90% CI 0.07; 0.53) in INWORKS. A joint analysis of the data allowed for a formal assessment of heterogeneity of the ERR per Gy across the two studies (P = 0.909), with minimal evidence of curvature or of a modifying effect of attained age, age at exposure, or sex in either study. There was evidence in both cohorts of modification of the excess absolute risk (EAR) of solid cancer by attained age, with a trend of increasing EAR per Gy with attained age. For leukemia, under a simple linear model, the ERR per Gy was 2.75 (90% CI 1.73; 4.21) in the LSS and 3.15 (90% CI 1.12; 5.72) in INWORKS, with evidence of curvature in the association across the range of dose observed in the LSS but not in INWORKS; the EAR per Gy was 3.54 (90% CI 2.30; 5.05) in the LSS and 2.03 (90% CI 0.36; 4.07) in INWORKS. These findings from different study populations may help understanding of radiation risks, with INWORKS contributing information derived from cohorts of workers with protracted low dose-rate exposures.

A Workshop on Cognitive Aging and Impairment in the 9/11-Exposed Population.

The terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 potentially exposed more than 400,000 responders, workers, and residents to psychological and physical stressors, and numerous hazardous pollutants. In 2011, the World Trade Center Health Program (WTCHP) was mandated to monitor and treat persons with 9/11-related adverse health conditions and conduct research on physical and mental health conditions related to the attacks. Emerging evidence suggests that persons exposed to 9/11 may be at increased risk of developing mild cognitive impairment. To investigate further, the WTCHP convened a scientific workshop that examined the natural history of cognitive aging and impairment, biomarkers in the pathway of neurodegenerative diseases, the neuropathological changes associated with hazardous exposures, and the evidence of cognitive decline and impairment in the 9/11-exposed population. Invited participants included scientists actively involved in health-effects research of 9/11-exposed persons and other at-risk populations. Attendees shared relevant research results from their respective programs and discussed several options for enhancements to research and surveillance activities, including the development of a multi-institutional collaborative research network. The goal of this report is to outline the meeting's agenda and provide an overview of the presentation materials and group discussion.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Dosimetry Used in Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A monograph systematically evaluating recent evidence on the dose-response relationship between low-dose ionizing radiation exposure and cancer risk required a critical appraisal of dosimetry methods in 26 potentially informative studies. METHODS: The relevant literature included studies published in 2006-2017. Studies comprised case-control and cohort designs examining populations predominantly exposed to sparsely ionizing radiation, mostly from external sources, resulting in average doses of no more than 100 mGy. At least two dosimetrists reviewed each study and appraised the strengths and weaknesses of the dosimetry systems used, including assessment of sources and effects of dose estimation error. An overarching concern was whether dose error might cause the spurious appearance of a dose-response where none was present. RESULTS: The review included 8 environmental, 4 medical, and 14 occupational studies that varied in properties relative to evaluation criteria. Treatment of dose estimation error also varied among studies, although few conducted a comprehensive evaluation. Six studies appeared to have known or suspected biases in dose estimates. The potential for these biases to cause a spurious dose-response association was constrained to three case-control studies that relied extensively on information gathered in interviews conducted after case ascertainment. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for spurious dose-response associations from dose information appeared limited to case-control studies vulnerable to recall errors that may be differential by case status. Otherwise, risk estimates appeared reasonably free of a substantial bias from dose estimation error. Future studies would benefit from a comprehensive evaluation of dose estimation errors, including methods accounting for their potential effects on dose-response associations.

Epidemiological Studies of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation and Cancer: Summary Bias Assessment and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ionizing radiation is an established carcinogen, but risks from low-dose exposures are controversial. Since the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII review of the epidemiological data in 2006, many subsequent publications have reported excess cancer risks from low-dose exposures. Our aim was to systematically review these studies to assess the magnitude of the risk and whether the positive findings could be explained by biases. METHODS: Eligible studies had mean cumulative doses of less than 100 mGy, individualized dose estimates, risk estimates, and confidence intervals (CI) for the dose-response and were published in 2006-2017. We summarized the evidence for bias (dose error, confounding, outcome ascertainment) and its likely direction for each study. We tested whether the median excess relative risk (ERR) per unit dose equals zero and assessed the impact of excluding positive studies with potential bias away from the null. We performed a meta-analysis to quantify the ERR and assess consistency across studies for all solid cancers and leukemia. RESULTS: Of the 26 eligible studies, 8 concerned environmental, 4 medical, and 14 occupational exposure. For solid cancers, 16 of 22 studies reported positive ERRs per unit dose, and we rejected the hypothesis that the median ERR equals zero (P = .03). After exclusion of 4 positive studies with potential positive bias, 12 of 18 studies reported positive ERRs per unit dose (P = .12). For leukemia, 17 of 20 studies were positive, and we rejected the hypothesis that the median ERR per unit dose equals zero (P = .001), also after exclusion of 5 positive studies with potential positive bias (P = .02). For adulthood exposure, the meta-ERR at 100 mGy was 0.029 (95% CI = 0.011 to 0.047) for solid cancers and 0.16 (95% CI = 0.07 to 0.25) for leukemia. For childhood exposure, the meta-ERR at 100 mGy for leukemia was 2.84 (95% CI = 0.37 to 5.32); there were only two eligible studies of all solid cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic assessments in this monograph showed that these new epidemiological studies are characterized by several limitations, but only a few positive studies were potentially biased away from the null. After exclusion of these studies, the majority of studies still reported positive risk estimates. We therefore conclude that these new epidemiological studies directly support excess cancer risks from low-dose ionizing radiation. Furthermore, the magnitude of the cancer risks from these low-dose radiation exposures was statistically compatible with the radiation dose-related cancer risks of the atomic bomb survivors.

Epidemiological Studies of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation and Cancer: Rationale and Framework for the Monograph and Overview of Eligible Studies.

Whether low-dose ionizing radiation can cause cancer is a critical and long-debated question in radiation protection. Since the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation report by the National Academies in 2006, new publications from large, well-powered epidemiological studies of low doses have reported positive dose-response relationships. It has been suggested, however, that biases could explain these findings. We conducted a systematic review of epidemiological studies with mean doses less than 100 mGy published 2006-2017. We required individualized doses and dose-response estimates with confidence intervals. We identified 26 eligible studies (eight environmental, four medical, and 14 occupational), including 91 000 solid cancers and 13 000 leukemias. Mean doses ranged from 0.1 to 82 mGy. The excess relative risk at 100 mGy was positive for 16 of 22 solid cancer studies and 17 of 20 leukemia studies. The aim of this monograph was to systematically review the potential biases in these studies (including dose uncertainty, confounding, and outcome misclassification) and to assess whether the subset of minimally biased studies provides evidence for cancer risks from low-dose radiation. Here, we describe the framework for the systematic bias review and provide an overview of the eligible studies.

Cancer mortality update with an exposure response analysis among styrene-exposed workers in the reinforced plastics boatbuilding industry.

BACKGROUND: There is sparse and inconsistent evidence of an association between styrene exposure and cancer. METHODS: This study examines mortality patterns in a previously studied cohort of 5201 workers employed in two Washington boat-building facilities, extending follow-up 5 years. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated using state rates as referent. Cox regression calculated rate ratios (RR) per year employed in styrene-exposed exposed jobs. RESULTS: No excess deaths from lymphohematopoietic cancers (LHCs) were observed (SMR: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.74-1.30) when compared to the referent population; however, the relative risk increased with duration of employment in internal analyses. Conversely, lung cancer mortality was significantly elevated (SMR: 1.24, 95%CI: 1.08-1.41), but there was no evidence of a dose-response relationship. CONCLUSION: We found evidence that occupational exposure to styrene was associated with increased LHC risk, while no such association was observed for lung cancer.