When to be skeptical of negative studies: Pitfalls in evaluating occupational risks using population-based case-control studies

Suh Woan Hu, Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Jack Siemiatycki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study investigated arsenic and lung cancer incidence in a community setting in the Montreal area. Job histories and sociodemographic factors were collected by interview from 857 lung cancer cases, 533 general population controls, and 1360 controls with other cancers. Chemist-hygienists assessed each subject's life-time occupational exposure to 294 substances. Logistic regressions yielded arsenic/lung cancer odds ratios of 1.1 (95% confidence interval = 0.60, 1.7) based on cancer controls, and 0.82 (95% confidence interval = 0.41, 1.6) based on population controls. Risk did not rise with increasing level or probability of exposure. Worksite studies consistently show lung carcinogenicity from arsenic. Since confounding from other chemicals was well controlled, the most likely explanation is substantially lower exposures than in previous studies. The lack of association in this study demonstrates the need for caution in interpreting negative findings from population-based case-control studies, particularly when exposures are low or rare, as well as the difficulty in generating hypotheses from such studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)138-142
Number of pages5
JournalCanadian Journal of Public Health
Volume90
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Arsenic
Case-Control Studies
Lung Neoplasms
Population Control
Confidence Intervals
Population
Occupational Exposure
Workplace
Neoplasms
Logistic Models
Odds Ratio
Interviews
Lung
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

When to be skeptical of negative studies : Pitfalls in evaluating occupational risks using population-based case-control studies. / Hu, Suh Woan; Hertz-Picciotto, Irva; Siemiatycki, Jack.

In: Canadian Journal of Public Health, Vol. 90, No. 2, 03.1999, p. 138-142.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1bab10f20d0649448b8a3c712eefd543,
title = "When to be skeptical of negative studies: Pitfalls in evaluating occupational risks using population-based case-control studies",
abstract = "This study investigated arsenic and lung cancer incidence in a community setting in the Montreal area. Job histories and sociodemographic factors were collected by interview from 857 lung cancer cases, 533 general population controls, and 1360 controls with other cancers. Chemist-hygienists assessed each subject's life-time occupational exposure to 294 substances. Logistic regressions yielded arsenic/lung cancer odds ratios of 1.1 (95{\%} confidence interval = 0.60, 1.7) based on cancer controls, and 0.82 (95{\%} confidence interval = 0.41, 1.6) based on population controls. Risk did not rise with increasing level or probability of exposure. Worksite studies consistently show lung carcinogenicity from arsenic. Since confounding from other chemicals was well controlled, the most likely explanation is substantially lower exposures than in previous studies. The lack of association in this study demonstrates the need for caution in interpreting negative findings from population-based case-control studies, particularly when exposures are low or rare, as well as the difficulty in generating hypotheses from such studies.",
author = "Hu, {Suh Woan} and Irva Hertz-Picciotto and Jack Siemiatycki",
year = "1999",
month = "3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "90",
pages = "138--142",
journal = "Canadian Journal of Public Health",
issn = "0008-4263",
publisher = "Canadian Public Health Association",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - When to be skeptical of negative studies

T2 - Pitfalls in evaluating occupational risks using population-based case-control studies

AU - Hu, Suh Woan

AU - Hertz-Picciotto, Irva

AU - Siemiatycki, Jack

PY - 1999/3

Y1 - 1999/3

N2 - This study investigated arsenic and lung cancer incidence in a community setting in the Montreal area. Job histories and sociodemographic factors were collected by interview from 857 lung cancer cases, 533 general population controls, and 1360 controls with other cancers. Chemist-hygienists assessed each subject's life-time occupational exposure to 294 substances. Logistic regressions yielded arsenic/lung cancer odds ratios of 1.1 (95% confidence interval = 0.60, 1.7) based on cancer controls, and 0.82 (95% confidence interval = 0.41, 1.6) based on population controls. Risk did not rise with increasing level or probability of exposure. Worksite studies consistently show lung carcinogenicity from arsenic. Since confounding from other chemicals was well controlled, the most likely explanation is substantially lower exposures than in previous studies. The lack of association in this study demonstrates the need for caution in interpreting negative findings from population-based case-control studies, particularly when exposures are low or rare, as well as the difficulty in generating hypotheses from such studies.

AB - This study investigated arsenic and lung cancer incidence in a community setting in the Montreal area. Job histories and sociodemographic factors were collected by interview from 857 lung cancer cases, 533 general population controls, and 1360 controls with other cancers. Chemist-hygienists assessed each subject's life-time occupational exposure to 294 substances. Logistic regressions yielded arsenic/lung cancer odds ratios of 1.1 (95% confidence interval = 0.60, 1.7) based on cancer controls, and 0.82 (95% confidence interval = 0.41, 1.6) based on population controls. Risk did not rise with increasing level or probability of exposure. Worksite studies consistently show lung carcinogenicity from arsenic. Since confounding from other chemicals was well controlled, the most likely explanation is substantially lower exposures than in previous studies. The lack of association in this study demonstrates the need for caution in interpreting negative findings from population-based case-control studies, particularly when exposures are low or rare, as well as the difficulty in generating hypotheses from such studies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033067621&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033067621&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10349223

AN - SCOPUS:0033067621

VL - 90

SP - 138

EP - 142

JO - Canadian Journal of Public Health

JF - Canadian Journal of Public Health

SN - 0008-4263

IS - 2

ER -