Document ZnDBvDNe337gwrK1eNyY1qKkY

PL/UNTIFP^^ EXHIBIT I WV-00402 I PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT t3*?3.0f from the A. M. A. Archive! of fndnUrial Health June 1958. Vol. 17. pp. 634-653 Copyright 195S, by American .Critical Aitocioiion FROM An Epidemiological Study of mo Sfm Tamer Cancer in Asbestos Miners w nium e limu M.D.. and T. DAVID TRUAN. M.A., Pithkfgli Ever since the pronounced increase in the incidence of lung cancer among males became apparent, there have been attempts to associate it with one or another of the various elements in the environment of man. The approach used by some workers has been to suspect one or several sub stances and then set about in an intensive search for lung cancer among persons who have had anv exposure to those materials. In this connection. Smith 82 writes: "The tendency of authors reporting the coinci dental occurrence of primary lung cancer with silicosis or with any other theoretical etiologic conditions, has been to emphasize the percentage relationship in extremely small series of cases, with control cases which are not in any way comparable." It would seem inevitable that asbestos should come under scrutiny in this manner, because prolonged exposure to this material is known to cause a specific type of pneu moconiosis, and because persons who show this form of pneumoconiosis often come to autopsy and provide a. ready source of material for study. It was in this way that reports of the simultaneous occurrence of lung cancer and asbestosis began to accu mulate after the report of a case by Lynch and Smith ** in 1935. Within the next 10 years, about IS additional cases were re ported. and in 1954 Merewether 78 reviewed all deaths from asbestosis recorded in Eng land since March, 1924. Lung cancer oc curred in 16% of these cases. Cloyne,41 Accepted ior publication Jan. 20. 19S8. This study vas made possible through a grant from the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association. Medical Director (Dr. Braun) :ind Statistical Consultant (Mr. Truan), Industrial Hygiene 634 whose work is also, frequently referred to as establishing a connection between asbes tosis and cancer of the lung, reported in 1951 that cancer of the lung was present in 14.1% of asbestosis cases examined by him. In 1941, Nordmaiui and Sorge78 claimed to have produced lung cancer in mice which they exposed to asbestos dust. Since 1951, additional cases of cancer of the lung coexisting with asbestosis have been reported, and, according to Hueper ** about 100 such cases had been reported up to 1955. As a result, an association between the two diseases appears to have been ac cepted by many authors, and several writers were using the term ``asbestosis cancer'' of the lung. VVerber,89 in 1952, stated cate gorically that in 7% to 17% of cases of asbestosis. after a latent period of about \j/3 to 20 years, carcinoma becomes estab lished in the lung. On the other hand, not all authors ac cepted this alleged association without reservation. Saupe80 in 1939 reported that he had discovered no cases of lung cancer among 620 cases of asbestosis which he had examined; and in 1942, Holleb and Angrist48 expressed the opinion that the number of cases of asbestosis with lung cancer was too small for statistical evalua tion. In 1947, Wegelius88 reported 126 radiological])' diagnosed cases of asbestosis among 4/6 workers in Finland, and found no cases of lung cancer in this group. Goldblatt and Goldblatt in their section of Merewether's latest book,44 state: "But at tio stage in all these impressive researches was any clue obtained which might have offered any supjwrt to the possibility that nrhrstes co tld act is ; r * O . "//Vty i i i } J.VSC CANCER IN ASBESTOS MINERS is no reliable crilvriuti by which one cats anticipate carcinogenicity and. as is well known, relatively minute changes in the structure of a chemical carcinogen are suffi cient to diminish or eliminate carcinogenic action. If asbestos is indeed to be regarded as a carcinogen, the need is felt to demonstrate some property which can be regarded as something more than inertness." These authors advance the theory that, until some more experimental evidence of direct carcinogenesis by asbestos or a decom|iosilion product of it can be obtained, asbestos might be considered as a "co-car cinogen" which only induces a further de velopment of a preneoplastic condition brought about by something independent of the asbestos, such as an endogenous factor. Thus the literature, while tending to sup port the thesis that asbestosis is in some way related to the development of lung cancer, is by no means unanimous. Alto gether, it is perhaps more contusing than enlightening. A careful review shows that the majority of the reports are clinical and not epidoniologicai. They lack many ele ments necessary for the application of epidemiological techniques to their content, and most of the authors do cot make claim to having done so. What has happened is that succeeding authors have drawn conclu sions and generalized beyond the sco[r of the works which they quote. Nowhere, for example, have we found references to a population of asbestos workers, although several authors who have quoted the ob served incidence of lung cancer in autopsies of persons who also had. asbesiosis imply that this incidence applies to asbestos work ers, generally. We have likewise been unable to find any study which actually calculated the incidence of lung cancer zmong a population of persons who had asbestosis, and not just those who cmie to autopsy. With the exception of a jiaj>er * r'ot!,M none of those reviewed gave anv data on cxf>osurc and dust concentrations, and even Doll's paper merely mentions "scheduled" areas, by which is meant, "those areas where processes are carried on which were scheduled under the Asbestos Industry Regulations of 1931 as being dusty." . There is, furthermore, a complete lack of definition of terms as used in the pub lished literature. For example, the term "asbestosis," as used, may refer to changes observable only by microscopic examination of the lung tissue, or it may mean a radiologicnlly delectable condition. Most of the published reports obviously included women among their cases, but some of them do not give the number or projtortion of women involved in the study. There is also a lack of uniformity as to what type of exposure most studies have dealt with. Of 99 cases enumerated by Hueper5* in 1955. only 10 ap[Kar to have originated in the United States, and 7 in Canada. Some of the earlier reports ap parently included asbestos miners, but it can be assumed, since S2 of the 99 cases had originated in England, and since no asbestos mining operations are carried on in that country, that most of the reported cases have involved workers in the textile or fabricating industries. Such factors as smoking habits, family history of cancer, length of time in the industiy, and age of the individual case are also notably ahsent in the majority of these reports. With this understanding of the limita tions of the existing literature with respect to epidemiological generalization, it may be of value to consider in somewhat more de tail some representative earlier publications, a few of which were referred to briefly above. One of the most detailed studies and one which deserves the most serious considera tion is that reported by Doll2* in 1955. This study reviews causes of death among asbestos workers based on coroners' rec ords. It uIm> alUmp;.. i,. u>c iisk by studying records of men who worked for at least 20 years in exposed situations. Broun--Truas* A/ 635 o a. m. a. ARutirr.s or ixnrsrwAf. hh.ai.tii Doll concluded that lung cancer was a spe* citic industrial hazard of certain asbestos workers and that, after 20 years of expo sure. the risk is 10 times a> great as for the general jxjpulation. This article is important tor several rea sons. in addition to the definite conclusions at which if arrives. For example, it begins by stating that "in view of the infrequency of asbesrosis, this large number of cases <61 cases of lung cancer) suggests--but does not prove--that lung cancer is an occupational hazard of asbestos workers." Neither this article nor any previous one which we have examined presents any fig ures to prove that asbestosis is an infre quent occurrence. Estimates of the number of persons potentially exposed to asbestos dust in the United States alone vary from 10,000 to 35.000, and the incidence of asbestosis of any degree might be higher than Doll imagines. This study, like so many others, involves autopsy records. The number of persons involved in the statistical analysis is only 113, representing only 1,042.25 man-years of life. It is also true that in selecting men who had been employed for at least 20 years, the study automatically excluded those who died from other causes after shorter employment. Another reason why this publication is of importance is a statement which it con tains to the effect that "the strongest evi dence that it flung cancer) may be a hazard fin asbestos workers) has been produced by Merewether and by Glovne.'" -In 1951 Glovnen presented a. review of 1205 autopsies on persons who had worked in various dusty occupations. This number included 132 asbestos workers, of whom 121 showed "pneumoconiosis"--pre sumably asbestosis. Primary cancer of the lung occurred 17 times in this group, an incidence rate of 14.1% for lung cancer among asbestosis cases coming to autopsy. There were in his series 796 cases with sili----* -1"^ 6.9% of these also showed pri mary cancer of the lung. The incidence of lung earner in other forms of pneumoconio sis was 6.7%. and in 169 cases which proved not to have any type of pneumo coniosis it was 8.3%. Gloyne considered "the mortality of the asbestos workers" to be "disturbing." First of all, it is obvious that the paper does not deal with the "mor tality of asbestos workers." and secondly, it must be borne in mind that all of Dr. Gloyne's cases were submitted to him for study because the findings were unusual for uncomplicated pneumoconiosis. It can reasonably be assumed that cases, including those of asbestosis. in which the finding? weie not considered unusual were not sent to Dr. Glovne for examination. As a mat ter of fact, in the same paragraph in which he expresses concern over the incidence rate in asbestosis. Dr. Glovne himseif points out that the rate for lung cancer based on necropsies at the London Chest Hospital was 21.3% while the figures of the Registrar-General showed only 2.4%. He thus recognized that autopsies on a cer tain selected group of cases were not rqr resentative of the general population. It would seem, then, that notwithstanding the value of Dr. Gloyne's work, its importance as an index of the prevalence of lung can cer in asbestotics has been misinterpreted by some who have quoted him. AH that it really shows is the fact that in a group of 121 cases, selected for special study pri marily because they seemed abnormal by preliminary examination. 17. or 14.1%, had lung cancer. Merewether 71 in 1947. in the rej>ort of the Chief lnsj>ector of Factories, reviewed all cases rqmrted between 1924 and 1946 in which asbestosis was the cause of death or a coexisting condition. This work was later extended to include all such cases re torted up to December, 1954. by which time there were 344 deaths, including 205 males and 139 females. Among them were 55 cases (16%) of cancer of the lung. 41 in males and 14 in females. It is cjuite |vjssible that a large number of a:a not die of their asbestosis, or in whose 636 . P'J. 17, Junr. /W Ll SC CASCI.R /.V .4SUESTOS SILVERS death certificate it was not mentioned, may have been missed. The import of this 16% is enhanced by the simultaneous statement that the incidence of lung cancer in autop sies of the general imputation is only 1%. The danger of attempting to compare a rate found in 344 cases with the rate for the general population without respect to age, occupation, and many other variables, such as smoking habits, is obvious. Lynch/0 who with Smith** had reported the first case in 1935, reported 4 cases of carcinoma of the lung in a series of 49 autopsies on workers in an asbestos manu facturing plant who were shown to have "demonstrable deposits of asbestos in the lungs." This, of course, is not necessarily identical with the disease asbestosis. Lynch, himself, points out that, although this is an incidence of 8.2%, "both figures are too small tor very serious statistical types of calculation." Nevertheless, later writers have used this paper to strengthen the case for an association of carcinoma of the lung with asbestosis. It is also of interest that Klotz 43 found only the same number of cases of lung cancer in a series nearly 10 times as large, i. e., 4 in 478 cases of asbestosis. Behrens, as cited by Merewether,7* esti mated that, of 309 cases of asbestosis in the literature, 44 showed associated cancer of the lung--giving an incidence of 14.2%. This is an illustration of generalizing an incidence obtained in a group of cases which were undoubtedly reported only because some of them showed lung cancer, to possibly hundreds of asbestotics whose cases were never reported. The same ap plies to the conclusion of Teleky,8* who appears to have reviewed reports of 39 autopsies on persons with asbestosis among which 6 cases of lung cancer occurred. In formation from sources such as these does not justify generalizations with regard to mortality rates. . Perhaps no one has written so exten sively on the subject as has Hueper.SJS* In 1955 he reviewed the cases 58 reported 7Vuc prior to that date and enumerated a total of 99. Eleven of these were those dis cussed by Doll 23 and may have been cases covered by other authors. Eight were dis covered by Kennaway and Kennaway 82 in an analysis of death certificates, and, unless Merewether's study was incomplete, these cases should have been included in his re port. 'Of the remaining 80, it is quite pos sible that the 31 contributed by Merewether and the 17 by Gloyne contain some duplica tion with each other or with those of other English authors. Principles of the Epidemiological Method Dom w has pointed out that much of what is now thought to be pertinent concerning the comparative -frequency of 'rung cancer in different population groups has been de veloped from the analysis of clinical ma terial, particularly surgical and autopsy records, supplemented to some extent by the reported impressions of various clini cians based upon their personal observa tions. More recently, however, attention has turned to the systematic investiga tion of this problem by the same methods that have proved so successful previously in the study of communicable diseases, that is to say, by epidemiological methods. In order to apply this method of investi gation to the problem under discussion, we were of the opinion that a study should be planned so as to provide (1) a well-defined population group; (2) available data for all members of this population, including the healthy as well as the ill; (3) a sample which is truly representative of the popula tion; (4) reliable and valid observations relating to the problem of the study. A. serious defect, common to most of the studies which have been reported, is that little or no information concerning the healthy people in the group seems to have been available to the author. In order' to draw a generalization regarding all asbesm* workers, it is necessary for a study to in clude living persons as well as the dead. /-V is.tr A. U. A, ARCHIVES OF INDUSTRIAL HEALTH Limiting the investigation to cases coining be found in another group of the same size, to autopsy, as has been frequently done in but representative of the general population. earlier studies, still further restricts its use It is true that investigation of cases from in generalization. The problem with which such a sample can furnish information we are concerned, is whether asbestos valuable for research, but the use of this miners experience more lung cancer than information in drawing generalizations is does the general population. The answer necessarily restricted. It is the obligation necessitates the collection of reliable infor of both the investigator and of those who mation on asbestos miners as a group, as read his report to make proper comparisons well as on the general population. and to draw only those conclusions which It seems advisable to discuss the differ are valid and justified. A good statistical ences between the epidemiological approach study of cases of cancer of the lung occur and that used in the studies which have ring in a group of autopsies can lead to a been reported to date. A very important proper inference concerning the frequency consideration is the fact that lung cancer, of lung cancer among cases coming to in spite of its increasing numbers, is still a autopsy, but only to such cases. For in disease of iow incidence; that is. in a given formation from such a study to be pro population not many persons will contract' - vetted to some' larger group, it is necessary this particular disease. This fact requires that the autopsies represent a good sample that large samples or groups must be stud of that larger group. To assume that such ied to provide meaningful results. is the case in any particular series is dan Recognizing the difficulty of obtaining such large samples, most earlier writers deviated from the epidemiological method and sought to circumvent the requirement of observing well persons by (I) compar gerous and likely to be false. There is some danger that the figures rq)orted by some authors may be miscon strued as applying to asbestos workers or even asbestos miners, when, in fact, the ing the relative frequency of cancer in vari ous sites: f2) comparing the relative frequency of cancer in a group of hospital authors in question do not make this gen eralization. nor can the generalization be made for the reasons stated. Close study of ized patients; (3) comparing the relative frequency of cancer in a group of cases coming to autopsy. Attempting to compare two imputation groups. looking only at the relative fre quency of cancer in various body sites, may result in finding a higher percentage {'relative frequency) in one of the groups, when, in fact, the mortality rate of cancer of a particular organ is exactly the same in both groups. This is- very clearly dem onstrated in the excellent article by Dorn.30 The mortality rate from a particular cause is the true measure of comparison. It is apparent that selected groups such a$ hospitalized patients or autopsy cases the reports reveals that the percentages cited relate only to the group of autopsies covered by the particular investigation. The present study, in contrast to the earlier works, has been planned to utilize the epidemiological method. A well-defined group of nslKStos miners has been estab lished in such a way that it constitutes a good sample of the whole population of asbestos miners in Quebec. Data for all members of this group have been collected and analyzed. Those concerning lung can cer have received most careful considera tion.- Details of the methods employed will he set forth later, but the type of approach is considered Vo. permit of fair comparisons and valid generalizations. may not be in any way representative of a larger group, and that in dealing with Collection and Analysis of Data such samples, the observer may easily find A preliminary survey cf >UUtCC$ cases .of a given disease than would of information in February, 1956, involved 63S Vol. 17. Ju*e. 19M /V T"<^-2. o /.r.Y<; CJXl HR /A* JS/lhSTOS MIXlifts di.'icussiuns with the physician,1. in charge of the asbestos companies* program* ami with clinicians. pathologists. rcprtsentaiivcs of City and Provincial health departments anti of the Canadian Cancer Society, anti other interested jnrrsons. Jt was found that morbidity data, although somewhat limited, were available from such sources as the hospitals in Montreal and Quebec City, and the 13 cancer detection centers in the Prov ince. However, because of the high mor tality itt lung cancer, it seemed advisable to depend njon data relating to deaths. These we found to Ik; obtainable at the vital statistics department of the Ministry of Health in Quebec City. Front the pre liminary survey, it was apparent that exten sive and detailed information could be gathered with respect to both the |>ersnti> employed in the asbestos mining industry and the mortality figures tor the general population. Following this exploratory survey, the initial effort was directed to the collection of data relating to all workers who had been processed through the clinic at Thelford Mines since its inception in 1947. and similar information regarding all workers at Asbestos. Que. Data front the clinical records included the age. family and per sonal medical histories, smoking habits, number of years of exposure, an estimate of weighted exj>osure. ami the course of the individual's health status or the cause of his death. From this information it was jwissiblc to formulate a "cohort" which could be well defined, should be representative of the whole group, and could be followed for a definite period of time. All of the available experience' indicates that the development of asbestosis in less than five years of ex posure must be somewhat rare. Accord ingly. the cohort was defined as including eveiy miner who had a total exj>osure of five or more years, and who was on the employment rolls in 1950. Office and other nonexposed personnel, regardless of length of employment, were not included. This cohort was then followed by mean* of the annual physical examination records through a six-year interval, 1950 through 1955. All data regarding this group were then tabulated in order to determine the characteristics of the cohort. For those who survived the entire j>eriod. reference was made to the physical examination results and x-ray findings at the end of the period. Those who had died were tabulated sepa rately, and the cause of death was corroborated by examination of the death certificates. A further search was made concerning those in the original cohort who remained unaccounted for when the living and [he known dead had been tabulated. They represent men who had left employ ment through retirement or resignationKvemuaiiy. all but a small number of these were accounted tor as either living or dead, and in the latter event, the cause of death was substantiated in a similar manner, and the results added to the original list of deaths. Death certificates for the Province of Quebec for the years 1952 to 1955, inclu sive, were reviewed in the department of vital statistics ol the Provincial Health Ministry, together with statistical sum maries of the causes of deaths in the Prov ince by counties. All cases in which death was certified as having been due to pri mary cancer of the lung were examined for such information as place of residence, occupation, date of death, hospital in which death occurred, and whether or not an autopsy was performed. Cases in which lung cancer was given as a cause of death, but in which it was not specified as to whether the cancer originated in the lung, were also reviewed in an effort to include all instances of primary carcinoma of the lung in the study. The statistics for the Province of Quebec relate to population, total deaths from all causes, total-deaths from nrr:r cf and deaths from lung cancer. These were collected and tabulated by counties and by sex for the years 1950 to 1955. inclusive. Braun--Tnutit 639 // 6 ofj. A. M. A. AtiCl/irtiS or IXPUSTRIAL HhAI.TJi From them, death rates for the general population of Quebec and of individual counties were calculated for specific years and analyzed by cause. Practically all employees of one company are covered by a group policy of life insur ance which, fortunately, nearly all of them continue to carry when they retire. A very few are not covered by this policy, and those who leave the industry for one reason or another except retirement usually are no longer covered, but this is likewise a small number. As an additional check upon the information obtained from the clinical records on this group, .the records of the life insurance company were examined for all death claims paid under the policy, and particular notice was taken of the claims in which the proof of death was based on cancer of the lung. In addition to this analysis of deaths oc curring in the cohort and during the years under observation, every known death from cancer of the lung, as well as every case diagnosed but still living, has been tabulated and analyzed. They will be discussed separ ately from those included in the population and time-interval under study. A comparison of lung cancer mortality in the asbestos-producing counties has been made with that in counties which are far removed from the asbestos mines and in which, presumably, no asbestos miners live. Finally, in order to broaden the compari son of death rates in different population groups, the rates have been collected for Canada generally, and tor the United States, according jo the most recent published and unpublished material. Deaths from lung cancer among asbestos miners were thus determined from the clinical records in the medical service of the industry and checked by means of the death certificates and insurance company records. The deaths were then verified individually by reviewing them with the physicians in charge of the medical sen-ices. In this man ner, there was established a list of cases in which primary cancer of the lung is con sidered to have been proved as the cause of death. A few cases in which lung cancer is strongly suspected but not proved as the cause of death were considered separated*. Mortality rates have been calculated using both the "proved" and the total of "proved" and "suspected" cases during the years un der observation. Comparisons were then made between the death rales from the same cause among specific segments of unexjjosed persons. All lung cancer deaths, both suspected and proved, were carefully ana lyzed to determine possible relationship or correlations between the development of lung cancer and any factor known from the clinical records, such as family history of cancer, personal history of heavy smoking. asbestos. ot asbestosis, or exposure to Results and Interpretation The cohort which was constructed accord ing to the criteria described in the preceding section has been considered individually and compared with the general population. Description oi the cohort will be presented here as a preface to the results of the study: Oriental Cohen 1.4*1 Person* LWueteJ Final Cohort Urine in I9SS (working atul rftifCtl) head by 1955 Cancer of tune . Ouetiionilile catteer ot linn.' Other cause* t'nknnwn reuse* Slimier* Xun-moler* - t'litiHiwn 4.091 1JJ $.951 s,m is; 9 .3 149 6 e.473 U5 20 Tables 1. 2. 3, and 4 present age. number of years of employment, weighted average cxjxmire, and smoking habits of the cohort. A comparison of the exposure tu asbestos dust is presented in Table 3. AH members of the cohort were placed in ooe of three categories, representing increasing degrees of exj*osure based on a weighted average of the years sj*nt at various levels of dustiness. The degree of dustiness for each job category was determined after lion with [Arsons familiar with the environ ment and conditions in the various work 640 I'nl. IT, Jum\ JVSX /-v '\'A LUNG CANCER IN ASBESTOS MINERS Table 1,--Number and Percentage Distribution Table 2---Number and Percentage Distribution by by Age Length of Employment Ate 30-44.................. ' . . 42-64.......................... UnkooTi_.......... Totals.. .......... Anr Alt____ ____ * Leu thee 0.3% Number ret Cent 100 EmLtpnttotbvaettni M....................................... 20-29......... -........................... Number 1.79S Vb Per Cent 30 l . Teuls........................ Arerve rears olmprmoi 2.921 100 areas. For the purposes of calculation, the assumption has been made that the relation ship between these categories is linear, and that Category II is twice as dusty, and Category* III three times as dusty as Cate gory I. tiaJK* smoking more than five cigarettes per day. Persons who smoke pipes or cigars exclusively were not considered to be smok ers for the purpose of this study. Table 5 presents the year-by-year ex perience of the cohort and indicates the Table J.--Number and Percentage Diiir-butim by Exposure Category Esooture Catecorr t............................... It............................... TtJiot.to..e..e..U.............................................. Touls................. Asm** Etpoort_......... Number Ter Ceoi 34 3A 100 * Un tbaa 91*7, TaBLe A.--Number and Percentage Distribution fry Smoetng Habits Smolcice Hapus Sutlers...... . Noasmosers... Qnttowv..., Teuls Number 4.573 l.JW 20 3.93* Ptr Cent i 21 * 100 * Less than 0.5%. The fourth variable, smoking habits, was similarly tabulated and is shown in Table 4. This was included because the informa tion was available and because smoking was regarded as one of the variables which, besides the environment, could conceivably influence the development of lung cancer. As used in this presentation, the term smoker refers to a cigarette smoker, habit- number of deaths each year from specified causes. In general, a case was considered to be "proved" as one of primary cancer of the lung when the records showed that the diagnosis had been supported by an autopsy or surgical resection of the lung with microscopic examination of the re moved tissue. In one case so considered, however, diagnosis was confirmed by bron- . Table S.-Year-by-Year Experience of Cohort and Death Rates per 100JD00 ' Man-Years of Risk Cause of Peatb Yaw o( Year Ca- at Lott* CSaPu.rsoipmleLcatureydf| COatuhseers 1*30................ 1921................. 11994223.................................. 1*3*................. Totals.... 1 l 12 0 3rt?4 0 33 3 36 TO ie "Proved" rare per 100.000 men-eeanef ruk 1-- 22j Unknown 1l 04 0 Mao-Ytsrs el Rut 3.920 24..9W33OJ 2.8662 3.790.3 13.771.3 --u per 1COPU0 tun-run ot mi- _ W.o Broun--Truon /V o I I A. M. A. ARCHIVES OP INDUSTRIAL HEALTH Ta8L 6.--"Prned" Case.t of Primary Cancer of the Lung Cut No. Art M 44 SS 59 *4 41 46 IT 44 Scooter Yes Yes Yes Yea Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Etposun 3 yr. in Cal. 1 23 yr. in Cal. It 10 jt. in Cot. 1 2S yr. in Cat. Ill Died 10-15-51 4- J-44 T-50-55 4-20-y) -51 4-30-43 lt-73-43 4- 5-5S 4- *45 Autopsy Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Branch. Asbesiosis Yes So No So Yes Yes No choscopv with visualization and biopsy. In would be very close to the 95level another, although there was no autopsy, the of significance. However, having found just diagnosis of primary cancer of the lung 12 cases, we are not above this level, and seems to have been beyond question. therefore the hypothesis that asbestos miners The term "suspected" primary cancer of do not have a higher mortality from lung the lung was applied to those cases in cancer than does the general population can- which the diagnosis remains in doubt butnot be rejected. Nevertheless, the occur- some of the evidence points to cancer of the rence of 12 cases in this sample would lung. There were three such cases. ,, increase the rate to a point which approaches The term "man-years of risk" has been the significant level. Because of the tre- used to mean the number of men at risk menaous importance of the questionable for the year under observation. A person cases in this respect, some detail regarding who lived throughout the year was counted them will be given here, as a full man-year of risk, but one who diet! In une of these cases, the suspicion of during the year was counted as one-half a cancer of the lung is based upon the x-ray man-year. interpretation, and, although no autopsy was Deaths occurring in the cohort, and in performed, the death certificate indicates which lung cancer is considered to have that death was due to lung cancer. It is been proved as a cause, are shown in Table well known that the x-ray appearance of 6. In Table 7 are shown three deaths which fibrosis, especially if a localized density or have been considered as "suspected" lung a superimposed tuberculous lesion is pres- cancer cases. ent, can simulate that of a tumor, and by An indication of the importance of these itself, does not justify the inclusion of this "suspected" cases in interpreting the results case as one of "proved" cancer of the of the calculations is desirable before fur- lung. A second case was certified as having ther discussion of the mortality rates which died by reason of hydrothorax, possibly due are derived in later tables. For example, it' to lung cancer, but again there was no happens that the rate found for the proved surgery and no postmortem examination, cases is close to the "expected" rate based In the third case, although it was subjected on the general population figures for the to autopsy, two pathologists disagreed as to Province, as will be shown later, and on whether lung cancer was present. The death this basis we should find eight deaths from was certified as having been due to chronic lung cancer among the cohort. Actually, myocarditis with nephritis and pulmonary nine cases were observed. If, however, the congestion, and possibly cancer of the lung. 3 additional "suspected" cases were in- On the basis of these facts, it seems unwar- duded, increasing this figure to 12, the total ranted to include these three cases among Table 7.--'"Suspected" Primary Cancer of the Lung Cue No. 1 1 1 AM *4 44 Smoker Ye* Yes Yes Elposur* 37 JT-In cl. til 33 yr. in Cel. Ill 43 yr. In CL It DM Id-74-40 7- *43 e-JO-AS Autopsy No Yes No Asbenosa No Yes No 642 Vet. 17, June. 10SS ? 6 } wxi; c.txci'.R ix asbestos' mixers "proved" instances of lung cancer. (Jn llie other hand, they cannot, in fairness, be dis regarded completely. U is fur this reason that mortality rates have been calculated both ways. Tabic 8 gives the rates by age groups. The rates by length of employment are shown m Table 9. During the first 40 years of employment, the rate rises, an observa tion which seems plausible since the men were growing older. However, after 40 years of exposure there are no "proved" cases r<|X3rted for a total of 240 men dur ing the six years, or about 1440 man-years of exposure. When the "susixrcted" cases are added, one case does show up in this Tabi.e S.--Lung Cancer Death* by Aye Croup* Table Lung C'oncer Deaths by Length "j Employment Numhef of Per*nn* jihI Number of Lunir Caneer Death- . No. uf (Hath! Emiitnymeut Persons Tr*j*ed Total A-9 ............... 10-19............... 3U-29............ jy-m.......... 50+............. Totalsi.......... 5.95S 0 1 0 9 0 12 Rate* per 100.000 Alatt-l ear* ot Exposure Rntutoyrneni 3-9............. 1IVI9............... . 20-39............... 30-39............... ............ . SO-r ............... 0*er- Troecd 0 54 111 0 0 25 0 * 193 90 14 Number of Persons and Number el t.uni; C.snetr Death* AieUrvuii ' No. of Tenons No.nl IV-.ilns - I'mvm Tout 20-44.............................. 15-54.............................. U-4.............................. 54-................................ Unknown................... 3.901 1.124 MJ 315 3 I I 3 4 V I 3 3 5 0 Totals............. 5.958 9 12 ACC ftoup SM............ ..... . Man* War* of Etfesurr I'fOMnl Overall..... ......... 25 Tout 4 44 * 34 {eriod. This would produce a rate of 69 }>er 100.UOO. again demonstrating the imjsortance of these questionable, but un proved. cases to the final conclusion, Isecause. it there were no cases in this number of men with long exposure, and if asbestos is a carcinogenic agent, it must be concluded that these 240 men have demon strated considerable resistance. This is a bio logical phenomenon which has been observed previously and is consistent with the theory of an intrinsic or endogenous factor in can cer. The only other explanation would be that the susceptible members of this age group had died earlier of lung cancer. Table 18. which appears later in this sertinn. in dicates that the members of the cohort did not die from lung cancer at a younger age than the general population. The rates by weighted exposure are shown in Table 10, and it will be noted that they present strong evidence against asbestos being a carcinogenic agent, for. if exposure to asbestos is in any way con nected to lung cancer, we would expect that the longer and heavier the exposure, the higher the rate that would be found. The only possible error in this interpretation could occur if the weighted exposures were inversely related to years of employment, Tahi.k 10.--/."/ Canter Deaths by Exposure Category Number of Perron* and Number of tune Caneer Death! Csiecorv No. of Persons No. of Delhi Trorert Total !........................... .. tl........................... . HI........................... Unknown................ 2.031 2.1.91 4 3 2 0 4 4 1 0 Tools_____ .. 3.95b 9 12 Annual lame Caneer Death Rates per 100.000 Man-War* 01 Exposure Eipnsute Category Ppjeed Tots t............................ tt ........................... m............................ Untoo-n........... u A Ortr-alt....... . 25 34 Urnun--7*ruevx 643 AV /1 rerror A. M. A. ARCHIVES OF INDUSTRIAL HEALTH Tahif 11.--Number of person* in Various Weighted Exposure Categories by Length of Employment Table 12.--Lung Cancer DeaJh for Smokers and Nonsmokers Emiiloyrrent K3M-09 4e0o-sa-o Touts A>trm yun eteipoaurv W'ciehied Einnsurr Oltiwm t It 111 63A14J 34 S9S vu va 31 S341413439103?0I 3.130 1.733 US 1*4 IA.S Tout 3( 1393 K! 0 33 39.0 174 Number oi Perm* *nJ Number of Lun* Ca/xer Deiiht by $mokin< Habit* No. of Deaths 1'arsons Proven Total Nonsmoaerj........ ____ Uonon........ 1465 9 0 0 13 0 0 Totals 9 13 Annual Luny C inter Death Rate* per 100.000 Man-Years oi Exposure by smoiiftf Habits in which case the heaviest weighted ex* posure (Category III) would show the shortest length of employment. Table 11, which lists the number of persons in various exposure categories by length of employ* Smokers........ . Unenowii........ OTer.j||_ No. of Deaths ProeeO Toul 33 43 0 00 33 34 mem indicates that this error has not oc ^ smokers may have included a larger curred. In fact, the average number of years percentage of young men. Consequently, ad of employment for each exposure category ditional Tables. 15, 14. and 15 were con is almost identical. structed to show the distribution of smokers Table 12, which develops the rates for and nonsmokers by age. length of employ smokers and nonsmokers, is most striking. ment, and degree of exposure. Although It shows that not a single case of lung there are slight differences, they do not cancer developed among the 1265 non account for the fact that ail observed cases smokers and that all cases of lung cancer, of lung cancer were in smokers. In respecr both "proved" and `'suspected." occurred in to age (Table 13) the combined average smokers. age of the smokers was 4.9 years less than Table 12 was so striking that it was felt that of the nonsmokers. Table 14 shows that further verification was necessary. It that as far as length of employment is con- was possible that some abnormal distribu tion may have occurred, e. g., the non Table 13.--Number and Percentage Distribution of Smokers ond N(msmohert by Age Grouts TabLE 14--Number ond Peretntooe Distribution of Smokers and Nonsmokers by Length of Employment 41* Group 30-44.......................... . 4A-34............................ . W-6a....................... . *3-*- ............................ . Unknown.................... Totals______ . Anne* >ce.............. .. Number Scooter 3.3Cn 896 411 164 3 4.673 394 .Vensmofcer 334 ii 0. 1.363 444 Cnknown 1 40.7 Employment 5-0 ........................... . 10-19............................ . 30-39............................ 30-39............................ 40-t9............................ . 30+............................. .. Totals... Aeence lennn of tentileTmetn... . . Smokers 1.404 1.967 no S3 4.673 17.0 XonstuoKcr* sn 136 IN 166 71 71 1.76' 194 Unitnow < * 0 ir.o Ptrrcauit Distribution Ace Oroup Smoker Nonsmoker 30-H......................... *3-34......................... 33-64......................... 93+ ......................... Unknown.......... 344 17.7 16.0 114 0.0 Totals........ .. 1(% loo*; Unknown 10.0 3.0 100% * L*ssthan0O3%. 644 Lencth of Employment 3-0.................... 30-79................... 33+...................... Totalj... Ftrrentnie Distribution Smoker Nonsmoker J9.3 15.7 13\.1* 14 100% Unknown 0.0 100% Vol. 17. June. 1958 LVNC CANCER IN ASBESTOS MINERS Table IS.--Number and Percentage Distribution of Smokers etui Nonsmokers by Exposure Category * Isposure Cauiory t......................... tl......................... Smokers Nonsmokers Unknown Toula ____ lmn erposure cw|or7....,,fc____ 4.67} 2.0 t^5 1.9 20 2J Demography in the Provincial Ministry of Health. The data on total deaths, deaths from all forms of cancer, and deaths from cancer of the lung were obtained by sex and by county for the years 1950 through 1955. In addition, all death certificates which specified primary cancer of the lung, and all those which indicated lung cancer but did not specify the origin, were exam ined for the years 1952 through 1955. Prreeatate Distribution Etposur* Cautory Smokers Nonsmokers it......................... Unknown--.......... 37.5 26.' 0.1 Totals-- 1007. Unknown 20.0 45.0 0.0 1007. cemed, the smokers had worked about 2.3 years less on the average than the ndnsmokers. With longer exposure and greater age, one would expect the nonsmoking group to show a higher rate if lung cancer were due to asbestos. Table 15 shows that the average exposure category was almost the same for the two groups. Therefore, this variable seems to be of no importance in accounting for this difference. The result of this additional analysis is that none of these factors appears to lessen the effect of Table 12. Comparison of the Cohort Experience with that of the Province of Quebec, Do minion of Canada, and the United States.-- In order to make a comparison of the experience among asbestos miners with that of the general population of the Province of Quebec, statistics were gathered, as stated earlier, in the office of the Division of Table 16 gives a tabulation of the number of deaths from lung cancer in the Province and in the cohort for the years 1950 through 1955, and shows the annual rate per 100,000 in these segments. It will be noted from the table that the mortality rate for the "proved" cases in the cohort is only slightly higher than the rate for the Province. When the `'suspected" cases are included in the calculation, the rate tor the cohort rises to 33.8 per 100.000. which is about 50fc higher than the rate for the Province. This, it will be recalled from the previous dis cussion of the effect of the "suspected" cases on the results, approaches but does not exceed the significant level. One further interesting observation from Table 16 is the rather marked increase in the total number of cases for the Province between 1950 and 1955. It is assumed that at least pan of this increase is due to im proved recognition and reporting of lung cancer during the interval. For this reason, the years 1954 and 1955 were thought to be more nearly representative of actual condi tions. Even so, it is quite likely that the general population is not studied for lung cancer with the same diligence with which Table 16.--Comparison of Cohort xoith Province of Quebec Number of . Loot Canter Deaths Annual . Persons 1950 1951 1852 1953 1954 1955 Total 100.000 Prolnee 1,194.000 IPS 220 303 303 7 1,824 Cohort 5.923 t Tout * 3) Prated 1 213 Prettnoa 1.192.000 245 300 302 1.812 (atrludtnc eebestot workers) 22.5 In the Pwrtfire flrarr). It has beeo assumed all male lunt aor death! art loi men o. '.w,. SMfTAOpPphraMtIm. aau midpoint el tnt toumrreiM population (or 1951. apd tbe estimated population (or 1954 (Kapport, Dir. d* la D- {Number tli* In rahoet bajumttif ot V953. Broun--TntOH 645 Are Group 30-44 45-54 55-64 65+ TotaU A. M. A. ARCHIVES OF INDUSTRIAL HEALTH Table 17.--Lung Cancer Deaths far the Province of Quebec* Population nr.mo 203.101 UT.lMl iri.ouo L97.000 Nuraber 9i D*tht 19*4 Total Certified Specified Priaarv Toul Proved Toul Proved i? 13 11 9 67 ICO 36 3$ 43 69 39 >: ui 33 68 395 120 191 h 1955 Toul Certified Specified Primary Toul 17 60 U7 148 Prated 9 33 57 54 Tout 17 56 m 148 Proved s; 54 343 155 337 152 Ate Group 30-M...................... 45-54...................... 51-64...................... 45+........................ Over-all................ Death Races per 100.000 1954 Total Certified Specified prdaary Toul *4 Proved U14.7 27J 9.7 Toul 1.4 31.3 504 564 15.4 proves 1.3 14 4 03 4 34.0 8.0 1955 Toul Certified Specified Primary Total i* 39.? Proved 1.2 17.4 Toul Proved 15.1 132.3 :?.6 44.6 1=.: i:.s zr.z 44.6 13.3 Diu WO Ceaifi certificates. t tttirpate to' population oCjim! 67 appiyisi 1951 prcocita?e3 lor i| r"=ups (or males to th toul population lor 1954. u |vn to Rapport. Dir. :e ta Detaorrapnx. this disease is looked ior in the miners, and it seems probable that the mortality rates for the Province may be low. This wouid appear to be substantiated by the fact that the reporting of cases in the cohort showed no such increase over the same period. Tabie 17 was compiled to show the an nual age-specific lung cancer rate of cases in which the death certificate merely read "cancer of the lung/' as distinguished from those in which the diagnosis was confirmed by autopsy, surgery, or biopsy. The term "specified primary" refers to those cases in these two categories in which the tumor was specified as having originated in the lung. U will be noted that, of the total cases reported in 1955, a much higher percentage lhan in 1954 were specified as primary. The table also shows that a higher percentage or the total cases certified in 1955 were proved, again indicating increasing interest in this disease. A comparison has been made between the age-specific rates shown in Table 17, and those for the cohort, shown in Table 8. An average of the 1954 and 1955 rates for the Province has been used, since the 1955 figure was higher and may have been ex ceptional. 656 This comparison, summarized in Table 18, shows that the observed number of deaths in our sample is not significantly greater than the expected number of deaths, based on the average of the 1954 and 1955 figures for the Province. It is true that, in the case of the age group of 65 and over, the five deaths provide a figure which is almost significant at the 95% level. How ever, it should be noted that this number includes one of the suspected but unproved cases previously referred to. Furthermore, it is rather likely that the rate for the general population is understated in this age group, for the obvious reason that the exact cause of death in the very old is not Table 18.--Comparison of the Actual and Expected Number oj Lung Cancer Deaths by Age Among Asbestos Miners Art Qroup Province Total Specified Pntnirv Rat* per 100.000 30-44 45-M 55-64 awUoknovn 14 Jt.S :. na .. Observed So. Breeeted of Deaths No. Of No. of - -- , Mined Dotltu * Praood Toul 4.901 l.i:< 615 in Of | | 1 I1 >43 >4B 4B * The expected mimbtr u bawd ee the avreer of the 1954 od 1955 ett-soecifte rates lor ih Province of Quapec. I Actually 0.4. Vol. 17, }w%e. I93J * in. ' ............ .. - --- LUSC CAXCER IX ASBESTOS MIXERS Table 19.--Age Distribution of Adult Malts for Table 20--Annual Death Rotes ftr 100P00 f-'r Ike Province of Quebec, 3951 * Cancer of the Lung in Canada * Alt Group 3>-44...................... 45-34...................... 53-64...................... 45+........................ Toul..,,.,, * Rapport, 1934. province Numcxr Ttroenuit 18S.952 128,944 113.467 63 16 11 10 1,156.495 100 rerrenure in Cohort 66 19 5 100 a matter of the same intensity of interest as it is in younger persons. Table 18 also answers a question pre viously raised. It shows that the members of the cohort have not died from lung can cer at an age earlier than the general popu lation, and that such an explanation cannot be offered for the absence of lung cancer in 240 men with more than 40 years of employment referred to on page 643. * Before leaving this comparison of the Province with the miners, it should be shown that their age distributions are rea sonably the same. That this is the case can be observed from Table 19. It should be remembered that the miners retire and consequently, it can be expected that the oldest age group will be larger in the general population. The data presented in Table 20 indicate that the lung cancer rate generally decreases after age 70. There fore. we could expect the rate for all people over 65 to be smaller than the rate for the group between 65 and 75, which would apply to the oldest group of miners. It is felt that by using the whole adult male popula tion. we have developed rates for the gen eral population which are somewhat lower than if we had been able to exclude the people in the general population over 75. A comparison between the asbestos miners and the population of the Dominion as a whole was made, using statistical material from several sources. In one source. Phil lips T* gave age* and sex-specific rates for Canada for three periods between 1931 and 1952. The rates for males are given in Table 20. These figures show strikingly the increase in rates between 1931 and 1952, and this Braun--Trutm Ace Grouo UrwitrW All Aft* I931-IV33 0.2 0.9 0,n s3A.l \1.* . t2.5 1.4.1 10.7 15.6 1.2 11.4 24 Qroupt of Ytn 1941*1943 0.3 5.4 12 3 16.9 . 33.7 34.3 306 30.0 27.9 HJ 7.1 1950-1953 1.0 102 9 "Morulur (rom Lime Coneer in Canada.'' IM1 to 1952. increase is particularly marked after age 50, confirming an observation previously made, to the effect that until recently lung cancer has probably been underdiagnosed in the older age groups in the general popu lation. To use these figures for purposes of comparison, it is necessary to combine the rates for certain age groups in order to conform to the age distributions used in this study. Since the exact populations in each age group for the years indicated is not known, this must be an approximation. However, the rates would be somewhat as follows: Ar* Group :o-4 45-54 55-64 654- Rut S 27 69 90-95 These rates are, in general, lower than those developed for the total (proved and suspected) cases of lung cancer among the asbestos miners. The only large difference, however, is in the age group of 65 years and over, and it is quite possible that the rate for this group may have increased for Canada between 1952 and 1954 as it did for the Province of Quebec t'Table 17). A further comparison has been made with an over-all rate obtained from the American Cancer Society for respiratory cancer deaths in Canada in 1953. This rate, for males, is 20.8 per 100,000, or 5 more per 100,000 than Phillips' 1950-1952 rate, and compares with 2:.3 f.o ICC.C0C proved cases and 33.S per 100.000 for total cases among the 647 -I--11.r ......... --- I A. M. A. ARCHIVES OF IXDUSTRIAL HEALTH Table 21.--Xntnbtr of Deaths and Death Rates pit lOQi'Oft Ay ,4of Gnmps for the Adult Mole Population of the United Slates AC* Gratis 4S-M T Tout Population ZUStlOW s.s;o.ooo 44.CI9.On Cuts Kai* per 100,COO 6.ii m9134*u..95* 1S.J99 r.7 * Dtt (ram "VitaJ SuttJtia f Cbe United Stt<u." Vol. 1 *rvd 5. )UZ asbestos miners in this study. It is there fore obvious that there are no important differences between the rates for asbestos miners and those for the general [topulation of Quebec and the Dominion of Canada.' Since it is probable that figures for the United States are more complete and, there fore, possibiy more comparable to the data for the miners, age-specific rates were com puted from "Vital Statistics of the United States,'' Volumes I and If. for 1952. These rates have been tabulated in Table 21. It is apparent that these rates compare favorably with those for the asbestos miners as shown in Table S. Still other rates for the United States were obtained from the American Cancer Society, and for males, these were 25.3 per 100.000 in 1953, and 2S.Q per 100.000 in 1955. They are not identical with the rate calculated from the figures of the office of Vital Statistics, but this is possibly because the American Can cer Society rates are for males of all ages. Nevertheless, they. too. compare favorably with the rates of 25 for 34 for total cases) obtaining among the asbestos miners. Turning for a moment to a comparison between the asbestos miners and persons who are exposed to asbestos in one form or another fas distinguished from the gen eral population groups just discused, who have no exposure) an interesting observa tion can be developed by deduction. Hueper51 has stated that there are about 35,000 persons exposed in the United States, and we have found that the Canadian mines employ about 8000. Elsewhere, it has been estimated that the workers in England who have exposure total between 3000 and 5000. With workers in Africa, Denmark, Nor way, and other countries, at least 50,000 persons must be exposed throughout the world, and it can be assumed that this number has been fairly constant in the 20 years since 1935 when the first case of asbestosis with lung cancer was reported. At least 1,000,000 man-years of exposure has thus been accumulated, and this figure can be divided by the approximately 150 cases of lung cancer with asbestosis re ported during the 20-year period. This gives a rate of 15 per 100,000, which is at least indicative that any lung cancer rate which can be calculated for workers ex posed to asbestos dust is not much greater than that for the unexposed population. Comparison Between Eight Counties Ad jacent to the Asbestos-producing Areas and -Eight Selected Counties.--To compare lung cancer mortality rates in the counties sur rounding the asbestos-producing areas with another group of counties in which no as bestos miners are likely to reside, the rates were computed on the basis of figures ior the years 1950 through 1955. The eight counties selected tor comparison were Argenteuil. Chateaugay, Montmagnv, Portneuf, Richlieu. Riviere-du-Loup. St. Hvacinthe. and Terrebonne, mainly because they represent a wide geographic distribu tion throughout the Province. The counties selected because of their proximity to the asbestos mines include Arthabaska, Beauce. Drummond. Frontenac. Megantic. Rich mond. Sherbrooke, and Wolfe. Table 22 shows the number of lung cancer deaths for the years 1950 through 1955 for each of these counties, and a mortality rate, based on the adult male population in 1952. To emphasize the comparison, Megantic County has been shown separately, as has the Province of Quebec and also the Prov ince with the eight "asbestos-producing" counties subtracted. Because of its unique lung cancer death rate, Montreal et Isle de Jesus has also been listed in order to provide further comparison. It is apparent from me table that the lung cancer death rate for the eight counties 643 Vol 17, June, 1953 LING CAXCER /.V ASBESTOS MIXERS Table 22.--A'umber of Lung Cancer Deaths and Rate ptr 100.000 Man-Years Counties Merantlc Count' ptoeioceol Quebec Profme* ot Quebec its eitbt 'adjacent" counties Moatreal el Uk de iesw Male Lune Cancel Deatn* * Adult Male . Population Rate rer 193? 1930 IMl 1937 1933 1934 1935 Tout 100,000 U.ITO 3 1 3 3 1 4 sr.Ho 4 IS 83.0C0 ? s I.196.0U0 m ro 303 357 1621 22.6 1.100.000 190 JlT as :sr 274 Wt JSTft 3M.CO) 225 no 32.3 lx Is tuumed tbat <0 sale lunf oncer deacbs ecciured after tit 30. immediately surrounding the asbestos-pro ducing areas is practically identical with that of eight counties selected tor comparison. While Megantic County has a rate nearly twice that of the combined eight selected counties, it is lower than the rate for the Province, and considerably lower than the rate for Montreal. The figure for Montreal would certainiv be higher Except for the very low numbers of deaths reported for 1950 and 1951, and it wouid appear that in those years some error in reporting has undoubtedly been made. On the basis of the other years, 1950 and 1951 deaths would be expected to be about 200 greater. This would result in a rate of 40 per 100.000. The only possible conclusion from this comparison is that there is no evidence that the persons who live and work in the coun ties surrounding and adjacent to the as bestos-producing areas have any greater incidence of lung cancer than those who live elsewhere in the Province. Comment oh rill Recorded Lung Cancer Cases, Living and Dead, a/;io<7 the Asbes tos Miners.--Although a simple enumera tion of all the known or suspected cases of cancer of the Iting in these areas has no particular value from a statistical point of view, it is of interest to summarize such cases for the record. There were nine deaths prior to the beginning of the time period covered by the study, including one in which the diagnosis was mediastinal lymphosar coma. During the period covered by this investigation, there were nine proved cases and three suspected cases in the cohort. Through 1956 and to date in 1957, there were eight deaths, six of which were merely suggestive of cancer of the lung and in cluded such diagnoses as mediastinal lymphosarcoma, mesothelioma, cancer of the leg with metastases to lung, abscess of lung, and cancer of the pancreas. One other was diagnosed on the basis ot x-ray only. In addition, there are now living four cases in which the diagnostic evidence is strongly suggestive of lung cancer. This is a total of 33 cases of afl types, including 10 "sus pected" but unproved cases, and 4 that are stiil living. The remaining 19 constitute the total of proved cases of cancer of the lung among the asbestos miners since 1940. The proved cases averaged 59 years of age at death, and varied between. 37 years and 68 years. Their working span covered periods varying from a minimum of 14 years to a maximum of 37 years. Only three men had less than 2S years of em ployment in the industry'. Seven among those on whom such information is avail able had a weighted exposure placing them in Category HI, and six worked in an exposure represented by Category I. There were only 17 among these proved lung cancer cases in which we have in formation regarding the presence of asbestosis. Asbestosis was present in nine, although it was minima! in two. Two path ologists disagreed regarding its presence in another. At least seven of the 19 proved lung cancers, therefore, were not accom panied bv asbestosis. Summary and Conclusions Interest in tne question of whether there may be an association between lung cancer V' Broun--Trua* /-V / ty*o A. M. A. ARCHIVES OF INDUSTRIAL HEALTH and exposure to asbestos has been evident was not possible to trace 133 of these for since die report in 1935 by Lynch and Smith the whole period, but 5771 of the remaining of a case in which lung cancer and asbes- 5958 were found to be still living in 1955 tosis were both present. As additional cases or later. Of the 187 known dead, cancer in which the two diseases coexisted were of the lung was considered to have been reported, a causal association appears to reasonably proved in 9 and to be strongly have been gradually accepted by many suggested in 3. authors, although some workers considered the correlation to be inconclusive. The pres ent study was undertaken in an effort to de termine whether a causal relationship did, in fact, exist between exposure to asbestos and cancer of the lung. Since most earlier studies had been limited to enumerating the lung cancers The members of the cohort were studied with respect to age, length of employment, a weighted average of their exposure, and their smoking habits. It was found that 4673 were smokers within the definition of that term as used in this study. Thirty-four per cent of the cohort were more than 45 years of age, and thirty per cent had been found in certain selected samples, such as employed for longer than 20 years. Thirty cases coming to autopsy or death certificates per cent had a weighted exposure which in which asbestosis was mentioned, it was ..placed them in the category of highest ex apparent that they couid not fulfil! the re posure. quirements of an epidemiological and sta tistical approach to the problem. The present study was. therefore, designed to meet the requirements of this method. After a preliminary survey to explore the availability of reiiabie information, data were gathered on workers in the asbestos , mines in Quebec, based on their medical records. A cohort was defined as a group of asbestos miners having at least five years The mortality rate for lung cancer, as computed on the basis of nine "proved" deaths among the cohort was 25.3 per 100. 000. When the three "suspected" cases were added, the "total" rate for the cohort rose to 33.S. The importance of the suspected but unproved cases in determining, these rates has been reiterated because it is likely that such cases would not be included in the statistics for the general population and of exposure and who were in the industry because they influence the results so mark in 1950. Data relative to their characteristics edly. were collected and their status at the end According to the findings in this study, of a six-year period of observation was de the mortality rate from lung cancer does termined. In the case of those who had not appear to increase with length of ex .died, an exhaustive search of death certif posure or with degree of exposure, a fact icates and insurance records was carried out which presents strong evidence against the in order to determine as nearly as possible carcinogenicity of asbestos. the exact cause of death. Mortality rates Comparison of the experience among the from lung cancer for the genera/ population asbestos miners with that of various seg of the Province of Quebec and its various ments of the unexposed, comparable popu counties and for the Dominion of Canada, lation shows that the observed number of as well as the United States were calculated deaths among the miners is not significantly from statistics collected in the appropriate greater than the expected number. The rate places. Comparisons of the rates obtained for proved cases among the asbestos miners for asbestos workers and for the other popu (25.3 per 100,000) compares we/l with the lation groups were made according to ac rate of 22.S per 100.000 for the rest of the cepted statistical methods. Province. 2C.2 100.000 for adult Records were obtained on 6091 persons males throughout the Dominion of Canada. who fulfilled the criteria of the cohort. It It also compares satisfactorily with rates 650 Vel. ;7 }u*e. WJ / 7 *7^ o LL'XC C.IXCER /.V ASBESTOS MIXERS of 37.2, 25.3. and 28.0 obtained front various sources for adult males in the United States. Finally, in this matter of comparison, it would appear that the world-wide experience of persons exposed to asbestos dust is not worse with respect to lung cancer than that of the unexposed population. The counties surrounding the asbestos- producing areas, in which it is presumed most of the asbestos miners live, have al most identical mortality rates with those of eight counties widely scattered through the Province, and are lower than those tor the remainder of the Province, and much lower than the rate for Montreal. - Since 1940 there have been 19 cases in which the diagnosis of primary cancer of the lung may be considered to have been proved. Approximately halt of these cases were associated with asbestosis: All but one died in the recognized "cancer-age" and at least one-third had only the lightest ex posure (Category 1) to asbestos dust. On the basis oi what are believed to be complete and reliable data, it seems fair to conclude that the asbestos miners in the Province oi Quebec do not have a signif icantly higher death rate from lung cancer than do comparable segments of the general population. Furthermore, the death rate from lung cancer in the areas contiguous to the asbes tos operation# is comparable to that in areas widely scattered throughout the Province of Quebec and is lower than in some urban ized areas within the Province. REFERENCES 1. Alaseio Escobar, R.: Bronchial Carcinoma: Review oi 200 Cases. .1. Internal. Coll. Surgeons 26:375-379 (Sept) 1956. 2. Allen. M. L.: Bronchiogenic Carcinoma As sociated with Pneumonoconiosis: Report of 2 Cases. I. Indust. Hyg. 16:346-347 (Nov.) 1934. 3. Cartier. P.: A Contribution to the Study of Asbestosis. Arch. mal. profess. 10:589-595, 1949. 4. Anderson. C. S., and Dible. J. H.: Silicosis and Carcinoma of the Lung. J. Hyg. 38:185-204 (March) 1938. 5. Baader. E. W.: Asbestosis. Deutsche med. Wehnschr. 65:407-408 (March 17) 1939. Brnuft--Truon 6. Behrens. \V.: Experimental Asbestosis. Schweiz. Ztschr. all*. Path. 14:273-297. 1951. 7. 'Behrens. \V.. Jr.: The Clinical Picture and Pathol'tg: of Asbestosis. Ztschr. Uniallmed. u. Beruiskraiikh. 45:12<M40 (June 15) 1952. 8. Berlhnger. \V.. Increase of Lung Cancer and Diseases Due to Dust Inhalation, .Med. Khn. 27:1337-1342 (Sept, il) 1931. 9. Bercnbium. !.: Irritation and Carcinogenesis. Arch. Path. 33:233-244 (Oct.) 1944. 10. Boline: Asbestosis. Deutsche med. Wehnschr. 62:928-930 (June 5) 1936. 11. Bohme, A.: Resuits of Periodical Examina tions of Workers in an Asbestos Factory, Beitr. Silikose Forsch. 11:34. 1951. 12. Bovics. O.: Asbestos-Milling. Marketing and Fabrication. Information Circular No. 6869. U. S. Department oi the Interior, fllurenu oi Mines. 1935. pp. 1-26. 13. Bresiow, L.: Hoaglin. L.: Rasmussen. G.. and Abrams. H. K.: Occupations and Cigareite Smoking as Factors in Lung Cancer. Am. J. Pub. Health. 44:171-;31 (Feb.) 1954. 14. Bristol. L. I.: Roemgenoiogic Aspects of Silicosis and Asbestosis. A. M. A. Arch. Indust. Health U:1S9-195 (March) 1955. 15. Cancer of the Lung: An Evaluation of the Problem. Proceedings of the Scientific Section. Annual Meeting. American Cancer Society. Inc., Nov. 3--. 19j3. New York. American Cancer Society. Inc.. 1956. 16. Cartier. P.: Asbestosis Cancer of the Lung, in discussion On Smith. W. E.: Survey of Some Current British and European Studies of Occupa tional Tumor. Problems. A. M. A. Arch. Indust. Hyg. 5:262-263, 1952. 17. Cartier, P.: Some Clinical Observations of Asbestosis in Mine and Miil Workers. A. M. A. Arch. Indust. Health 11:204-207 (March) 1955. 18 Clerens. J.: Research into Pulmonary Asbes tosis in Belgium. Arch, beiges med. Sociale 8:557 565 (Nov.) 1951. 19. Clynes: Asbestosis and Silicosis, Brit. M. I. 1:379. 1931. ' 20. Coffin. G. J.; Dun.ee, H. C; Maier. H. C.; Pardee. H. E. B,, and Wymer, E. L.: The Effects of Tobacco Smoking. Panel Meeting. Bull. New York Acad. Med. 32:133-156 (Feb.) 1956. 21. Cohart, E. M.: Lung Cancer and Economic Status, Cancer 8:1126-1129 (Nov.-Dee.) 1955. 22. Cooke. \V. E.: Pulmonarv Asbestosis. Brit. M. 1. 2:1024-1025 (Dec 3) 1927. 23. Coreton, R. J. R_; Squamous Cctl Carcinoma Occurring in Asbestosis of the Lung.- Brit. J. Cancer 2:249-253 (Sept.) 194& 24 O'lrr ^ I - ^'Hneidenr.an. M. A, and Greenhouse. S. W.: Some Statistical Considera- 651 /V -2. O A. U. A. ARCHIVES OF INDUSTRIAL HEALTH in the Study of Cancer in Industry. Am. J. Pub. Health 4-1:1159*1166 (Sept.) 1954. 25. Davies, D. F.: Current Status of Lung Gmcer Research: Some Pathogenetic Aspects, CA 6:169-174 (Sept.) 1956. 26. Desmeules. R.: Rousseau. L.; Giroux, M., and Sirois. A.: Asbestosis and Pulmonary' Cancer, Semame de. hop. Paris 23:1820-1823 (Aug. 7) 1947. 27. Doll, R.: Bronchial Carcinoma: Incidence and Aetiology (Milrov Lectures, abridged). Brit. M. J. 2:521-527 (Sept. 5); 585-590 (Sept. 12) 1953. . 28. Doll, R.: Mortality from Lung Cancer Among Asbestos Workers, Brit. J. Indust. Med. 12:81-86, 1955. ' 29. Donnelly. J.: Pulmonary Asbestosis. Am. J. Pub. Health'23:1275-1281 (Dee.) 1933. 30. Dorn. K. F., and Cutler, S. J.: Morbidity from Cancer in the United Stales. Pub. Health Monograph S'o. 29. P. H. S. Publication No. 418. U. S. Public Health Service. 195?. 121 pp. 31. Dom. H. F.: Cancer Morbidity Surveys: A Tool ior Testing Theories oi Cancer Etiology, Am. J, Pub. Health 45:615-621 (May) 1955. 32. Egbert. D. S., and Geiger, A. J.: Pulmonary Asbestosis and Carcinoma: Report of a Case with Necropsy Fir.d'ings, Am Rev. Tuberc. 34:143*350 (July) i936. 33. Ellmar., P.: Pulmonary Asbestosis: Its Clinieai. Radiological, and Pathological Features and Associated Risk oi Tuberculosis Infection, J. Indust. Hjg. 15:165-183 (July) 1933. 34. Ellman. P.: Pulmonary Asbestosis, Proc. Roy. Soc. Med. 34:557 (July) 1941. 35. Feil, A.: Pneumoconiosis in Asbestos Workers. Presse med. 39:1872-1874 (Dec 19) 1931. 36. Fulton. W. B.; Dooley, A.; Matthews. J. L.. and Houtt. R- L-: Asbestosis: Part III. The Effects of Exposure to Dust Encountered in Asbestos Fabricating Plants on the Health of a Group of Workers, Special Bulletin Ho. 42, Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, Bureau of Indust. Standards, Sept. 20, 1935. 37. Gardner. L. U., and Cummings, D. E.: Studies on Experimental Pneumoconiosis: Inhala tion of Asbestos Dust; Its Effect upon Primary Tuberculous Infection, J. Indust. Hyg. 13:65-81 (Feb); 97 (March) 1931. 38. Gilliam. A. G.: Mortality Trends in Lung Cancer, Cancer 8:1130-1136 (Nov.-Dee) 1955. 39. Gilliam, A. G.: Mortality Attributed to Lung Cancer in the Large Cities of the United States in 1948 and 1949, J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 15:I307-13!2, 1955. 40. Gloyne, S. R.: Two Cases of Squamous Carcinoma of the Lung Occurring in Asbestosis. Tubercle 17:5-10 (Oct.) 1935. 4J. Gloyne. S. R.: Pneumoconiosis: A Histo logical Survey of Necropsy Material in 1205 Cases, Lancet 1:810-814 (Apnl 14) 1951. 42. Gloyne. 5. EL: A Case of Oat-Cell Car cinoma of the Lung Occurring in Asbestosis, Tuberete 18:100-101 (Dec) 1936. 43. Gloyne, S. R-. and Merewecher. E. R. A.: Asbestos, Occupation and Health, Supplement to Encyclopedia on Occupation and Health, Geneva, International Labor Office, 1938. 44. Goldblatt. M. \V.. and Goldblatt. J.: In dustrial Carcinogenesis and Toxicology, in In dustrial Medicine and Hygiene, edited by E. R. A. Merewether, London. London, Butterworth & Co., LtdL. 1956, Vol. 3, pp. 185-188. 4$. Haensrei. W. M.: Epidemiological Tests of Theories on Lung Cancer Etiology, Pub. Health Rep. 71:163-172 (Feb.) 1956. 46. Hammond. E. C.: Lung Cancer and Com- .mon Inhalants. Cancer 7:1100-1108 (Nov.) 3954. 47. Hammond. . C.: Etiology of Bronchiogenic Carcr.oma. CA 6:156-168 (Sept.) 1956. 48. Holleb. K. B., and Angrist, A.: Bronchio genic Carcinoma in Association with Pulmonary Asbestosis: Report oi 2 Cases. Am. J. Path. 38: 123-135 (Jan.) 1942. 49. Homburger. F.: The Co-Incidence of Primary Carcinoma of Lungs and Pulmonary Asbestosis: Analysis of Literature and Report of 2 Cases. Am. J. Path. 19:797-807 (Sept.) 1943. 50. Horn, D.: Is Lung Cancer on the Increase? Evaluation of Present Day Evidence: Cancer of the Lung. Proceedings of the Scientific Section, Annual Meeting, American Cancer Society, Inc., Nov. 3-4, 1953. 51. Horaig. F.: Qinical Considerations on the Question oi Industrial Cancer of Asbestos Work ers, Ztschr. Krebsforsch. 47:281-287, 1938. 52 Hueper, W. C.: Cancer in Its Relation to Occupation and Environment. Bull. Anu Soc. Control Cancer 25:63-69 (June) 1943. 53. Hueper. W. C.: Significance of Industrial Cancer in the Problem ot Cancer, Occup. Med. 2:190-200 (Sept.) 1946. 54. Hueper, W. C.: Environmental and Occupa tional Cancer, Public Health Service, Supp. 209, U. S. Public Health Service. 1949. 55. Hueper, W. C.: A Methodology for Environ mental and Occupational Cancer Surveys, Public Health Monograph No. I, P. H. S. Publication No. 12. U. S. Public Health Service, 1950. . 56. Hueper, W. C.: Environmental Lung Cancer. Indust. Med. 20:49-62 (Feb.) 1951. 57. Hueper, W. C: Occupational and Environ mental Pulmonary Cancers with Special Reference. to P...J....?, feedings, 7th Saranac Symposium on Pneumoconiosis. 19S2. 58. Hueper. W. C.: A Quest into the Environ mental Causes of Cancer of the Lung, Pub. 652 Vol. 17, Jufu. 19S8 ^ f JL. o LUNG CANCER IN ASBESTOS MINERS Health Moitograph No. 36. P. H. S. Publication No. 452. U. S. Public Health Service. 1955. 59. Hue-per. W. C.: Environmental Causes of Cancer of the Lung other than Tobacco Smoke. Dis. Chest. 50:141-158 (Aug.) 1956. 60. Isselbacher, K. J.; Klaus. H.. and Hardy. H. L.: Asbestosis and Bronchogenic Carcinoma: Report of One Autopsied Case and Review of Available Literature. Am. J. Med. 15:721-732 (Nov.) 1953. 61. Kennaway, E. 1_, and Keiaaway, N. M.: A Study of the Incidence of Cancer of the Lung and Larynx, J. Hyg. 36:236-267 (June) 1936. 62. Kennaway, E. L., and Kennaway. N. M.: Studies of Incidence of Cancer of the Lung and Larynx. Brit. J. Cancer 5:155-158 (June) 1951. 63. Klotz, M. 0. 'Association of Silicosis and Carcinoma of the Lung, Am J. Cancer 35:33-49 (Jan.) 1939. 64. Lanza. A. J.; McConnell. W. I., and Fennel. J. W.: The Effects of the Inhalation oi Asbestos Dust on the Lungs of Asbestos Workers: Pre liminary Study, Pub. Health Rep. 30:1-12 (Jan. 4) 1935. 65. Lanza. A. J., editor: Silicosis and Asbestosis. New York and London, Oxford University Press, 1938. 66. Lew. E. A.: Use of Life Insurance Com pany Records for Cancer Studies, A. M.A. Arch. Indust. Hyg. 5:198-203 (March) 1952. 67. Linzbach. A. J.. and Wedier, H. W.: Occu pational Cancer among Asbestos Workers. Arch, path. Anat. 307:387-409, 1941. 68. Lynch, K. M.f and Smith, W. A.: Pul monary Asbestosis: Carcinoma of Lung in Asbesto-Silicosis, Am J. Cancer 24:56-64 (May) 1935. 69. Lynch, K. M., and Smith. W, A.: Pul monary Asbestosis: A Report of Bronchial Car cinoma and Epithelial Metaplasia. Am. J. Cancer 36:567-573 (Aug.) 1939. 70. Lynch, K. M., and Cannon, W. M.: Asbes tosis: Analysis of 40 Necropsied Cases, Dis. Chest 14:874-8S9 (Nov.-Dec.) 1948. 71. McPheetets, S. B.: A Survey of a Group of Emplovees Exposed to Asbestos Dust, J. Indust. Hyg. 18:229-239 (April) 1936. 72. Merewether, E. R. A.: The Occurrence of Pulmonary Fibrosis and Other Pulmonary Affec tions in Asbestos Workers, J. Indust. Hvg. 12: 198 (May); 239 (June) 1930. ' 73. Merewether, E. R. A., and Price, C. W.: Repon on Effects of Asbestos Dust on the Lungs and Dust Suppression in the Asbestos Industry, London. His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1930. 74. Merewether. E. R. A.: A Memorandum on Asbestosis, Tubercle 15:109; (Deo.) 1933; 15: 152 (Jan.) 1934. 75. Merewether, E. R. A.: Annual Reports of `the Chief Inspector of Factories, London. His Majesty's Stationery Office. 1947. 76. Merewether. E. R. A., editor: industrial Medicine and Hygiene, London, Butte'worth & Co.. Ltd.. 1956. Vol. 3. 77. N'ordmann. M.: The Industrial Cancer oi Workers in Asbestos. Ztschr. Krebsforch. 47:288 302. 1938. . 78. Nordmann. M.. and Sorge, A.: Pulmonary Cancer Produced by Asbestos Dust in Experi mental Animals. Ztschr. Krebsforch. 51:168-182. 1941. 79. Phillips. A. J.: Mortality from Cancer of the Lung in Canada (1931-1952), Canad. M. A. J. 71:242-244 (Sept.) 1954. SO. Saupe. E.: Further Contributions to the Roentgenological Diagnosis of Asbestosis. Arch. Gewrrbepath. u. Gewerbehyg. 9:391-406. 1939. 81. Smith, K. W.: Pulmonary Disability in Asbestos Workers, A. M.A. Arch. Indus:. Healtli 12:193-203 (Aug.) 1955. 82. Smith. L. W.: Pneumoconiosis and Lung Cancer with Special Reference to Silicosis ami Asbestosis. Compens. Med. 2:3-10 (Nov.) 1949. 83. Smith. W. E.: Survey of Some Current British and European Studies of Occupational Tumor Problems: Part III. Asbestos. A. M.A. Arch. Indust. Hyg, 5:242-263 (March) 1952. 84. Stoll, R.; Bass. R.. and Angrist. A.: Asbestosis Associated with Bronchogenic Car cinoma. A. M.A. Arch. Int. Med. 88:831-834 (Dec.) 1951. 85. Teleky, L.: Occupational Lung Cancer, Acta Union intemat. contre Cancer 3:253-273. 1933; also. Zentralbl. Gewerbehyg. 27:33, 1940. 86. Vorwald, A. J.; Durkin. T. M., aod Pratt. P. C.: Experimental Studies of Asbestosis. A.M.A. Arch. Indust. Hyg. 3:1-43 (Jan.) 1951. 87. Wedier, H. W.; Asbestosis and Lung Cancer. Deutsche med Wchnschr. 69:575-576 (Aug. 6) 1943. 88. Wegelius. C.: Changes in the Lungs in 126 Cases of Asbestosis Observed in Finland. Acta radiol. 28:139-152, 1947. , 89. Werbcr. M.: Pulmonary Asbestosis Asso ciated with Carcinoma. Zentralbl. Arbeitsmed. u. Arbeitsschutz 2:179-180 (Nov.) 1952. 90. Wood W. B., and Cloyne, S. R.: Pulmonary Asbestosis Complicated by Pulmonary Tubercu losis. Lancet 2:954-956 (Oct. 31) 1931. 9!. Wyers. H.: Asbestosis, Postgrad. Med. 25* 631-638 (Dec) 1949. 92. Wyntltt. E. L.. and Graham. E. A.: Etiotugic Factors in Brondtiogenic Carcinoma \iiu bpeciai netercnce to Industrial Exposures; Report of 857 Proved Cases. A. M. A. Ardc Indust. Hyg. 4:221-235 (Sept.) 1951. 8rot**--Truon Pri+t44 fi/ Uniud 653 /v AG7CPST PPCTDCCL LUIACS, Xat? USC-HATCHT ACCZS3ICH KO. 10-?5-253 SX?i.'^2: October 27, 1?5? around 12 soon AUTCPSI: Perferred on the sir* d*7 it 7 P.H. in Kar.rills, . J. PPXSZCrCH: >n=hfll Jirds, M. 3. j?'-iTS'^V Cj" ". J: *C-yj't*C'/ "rs-r; 4 ^ // /i. //^J?f A W */ rr^rrrr