Document By3qjXG703Z8KaKOX80Eox3G4

! Colion code .I 2nt 2f 3 4 5a So 6 7 8 9 10 Tabic IS. Explanatory notes on cornet-data1 Lung cancer mortality Average cumulative exposure (f/mi y) From Berry (1995) Table 5 Lung cancer risk coefficient Mesothelioma risk coefficient Ku in HEI model ", \ SMR regression slope Regression Slope -- inte_r_n_al___ ___ Coefficient for exposure group Inferred from analyses in From de Klerk a al. (1992) covering cotiort mean in Berry Armstrong et at. (1989) and de (1991) Klerk tld. (1991) Given in text of main reference; Slayner el ul. (1997) give an overall estimate of 2.19 Exd. 4 mesotheliomas Excl. an estimated 4 mesotheliomas Exluding I mesothelioma Table 2 Tables 8. 10 and 11 Reported value of 0.56, conversion factor 3 Exposure specific rates inconsitcnl, wide range of slopes can be lilted. Data for asbestos factory cannot Tabic 8 Poisson regression (data in Table From IJddcll el <//..( 1998) lulled valucx33/38 to adjust for he consistently excluded, but 8) (Table 3) factory cases impact on risk estimate is minor Smoking adjusted data for 20+ Estimated from Fig. 4 in Neuberger yr latency from Neuberger and and Kundi (1991) Kundi (1993) Excluding an estimated 42 The range of exposure conditions likely to have been met by this group, and die long lime period over mesotheliomas (half the. which these exposures were accrued means that any estimate of the levels of exposure will be very difference between DC and BE approximate. Other reviews have adopted notional values of average exposure level os 15-30 f/ml and mesothelioma numbers) average exposure duration as 25 yr, implying a mean cumulative exposure around 500 f/ml.yr, this is likely to be very uncertain estimate. Excluding workers with <1 yr Overall mean is 73 f/ml.yr (Table 16); mean exposure duration 7.9 yr employment (Table 7); thus mean level around 10 f7ml; half the man years contributed by short term men (Table 8); assuming exposures of 5 f/ml.yr for slum tenn men implies exposure of 138 T/ml.yr for men with >1 yr exposure. From Table 3: the rdsult is sensitive Reported dose specific data has not been used here, since comparison of the man-years in (he dose : to the choice of mean dose in the specific categories of Table 3 of Piolotto ct al. (1990) with the number of men in these category highest category (which covers 30% strongly suggests that all the man-years of follow-up for men in each category lias been assigned to of men). With tire top dose mean the dose category they eventually achieve, lire exposure response is thus biased downwards by an set-at 500 f/ml.yr the overall mean unknown amount. r is 250, increasing to 400 if the top dose mean is set al 1000 f/ml.yr. A value of 300 has been adopted for this review. (Continued oil next /ige) S P n<' s I o* 3 .J i' * I