Re: Radon and Lung Cancer Gansu, China

[hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net]

Bill,

Did you notice that tha mean radon concentrations of cases and "controls'

were nearly the same (just 4% diff)? With the relatively small n (768),

raw data would likely show more reason for skepticism.

Howard Long

"Field, R. William" wrote:

FYI - Recent Residential Radon Study Published

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 155, No. 6 : 554-564

Residential Radon and Lung Cancer Risk in a High-exposure Area of Gansu Province, China

Zuoyuan Wang¹, Jay H. Lubin², Longde Wang³, Shouzhi Zhang¹, John D. Boice, Jr.^4,5, Hongxing Cui¹, Shurong Zhang¹, Susan Conrath⁶, Ying Xia¹, Bing Shang¹, Alina Brenner², Suwen Lei¹, Catherine Metayer², Jisheng Cao¹, Katherine W. Chen², Shujie Lei¹ and Ruth A. Kleinerman^2
1 Laboratory of Industrial Hygiene, Ministry of Public Health, Beijing, China.
² Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
³ Ministry of Health, Beijing, China.
⁴ International Epidemiology Institute, Rockville, MD.
⁵ Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
⁶ Indoor Environments Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

In the general population, evaluation of lung cancer risk from radon in houses is hampered by low levels of exposure and by dosimetric uncertainties due to residential mobility. To address these limitations, the authors conducted a case-control study in a predominantly rural area of China with low mobility and high radon levels. Included were all lung cancer cases diagnosedbetween January 1994 and April 1998, aged 30–75 years, and residing in two prefectures. Randomly selected, population-basedcontrols were matched on age, sex, and prefecture. Radon detectorswere placed in all houses occupied for 2 or more years during the 5–30 years prior to enrollment. Measurements covered 77% of the possible exposure time. Mean radon concentrations were 230.4 Bq/m³ for cases (n = 768) and 222.2 Bq/m³ for controls (n = 1,659). Lung cancer risk increased with increasing radon level (p < 0.001). When a linear model was used, the excess odds ratios at 100 Bq/m³ were 0.19 (95% confidence interval:0.05, 0.47) for all subjects and 0.31 (95% confidence interval:0.10, 0.81) for subjects for whom coverage of the exposure intervalwas 100%. Adjusting for exposure uncertainties increased estimates by 50%. Results support increased lung cancer risks with indoor radon exposures that may equal or exceed extrapolations basedon miner data.

Bill Field

****************************************************
R. William Field, Ph.D.
College of Public Health
Department of Epidemiology
N222 Oakdale Hall
University of Iowa
Iowa City, Iowa 52242

Phone:319-335-4413
Fax:     319-335-4748

mailto:bill-field@uiowa.edu

CV: http://expertise.cos.com/cgi-bin/exp.cgi?id=323385 ************************************************************************ You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/