Exposure-response relationships between the relative risk of
lung cancer and quantitative measures of exposure to
asbestos are available from a number of epidemiological studies. Meta-analyses of these relationships have been published by Lash et al. (1997) [Lash, T.L., Crouch, E.A.C., Green, L.C., 1997. A meta-analysis of the relation between cumulative exposure to
asbestos and relative risk of
lung cancer. Occup. Environ. Med. 54, 254-263] and Hodgson and Darnton (2000) [Hodgson, J.T., Darnton, A., 2000. The quantitative risks of
mesothelioma and
lung cancer in relation to
asbestos exposure. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 44, 565-601]. In this paper, the risks derived in these meta-analyses have been compared. Lash et al., concentrated on process and found that the risk of
lung cancer increased as the
asbestos is refined by processing. Hodgson and Darnton concentrated on fibre type and found that the risk was highest for exposure to
amphibole asbestos (
crocidolite and
amosite), lowest for
chrysotile and intermediate for mixed exposure. Some of the differences between the conclusions from the two meta-analyses are a consequence of the choice of studies included. The range of
asbestos types included in the studies in the analysis of Hodgson and Darnton was wider than that in Lash et al., enabling differences between fibre types to be analyzed more readily. There are situations where occupational exposure to
chrysotile asbestos has shown no detectable increase in risk of
lung cancer.
Taconite miners have shown no increased risk of mortality due to
lung cancer.