Authors’ response: Mezei et al's "Comments on a recent case-control study of malignant mesothelioma of the pericardium and the tunica vaginalis testis"
Mezei et al's letter (1) is an opportunity to provide more details about our study on pericardial and tunica vaginalis testis (TVT) mesothelioma (2), which is based on the Italian national mesothelioma registry (ReNaM): a surveillance system on mesothelioma, with individual asbestos exposure as...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health environment & health, 2021-01, Vol.47 (1), p.87-89 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Mezei et al's letter (1) is an opportunity to provide more details about our study on pericardial and tunica vaginalis testis (TVT) mesothelioma (2), which is based on the Italian national mesothelioma registry (ReNaM): a surveillance system on mesothelioma, with individual asbestos exposure assessment. Incidence of pericardial mesothelioma has been estimated around 0.5 and 0.2 cases per 10 million person-years in men and women, respectively, and around 1 case for TVT mesothelioma. ReNaM collected 138 cases thanks to its long period of observation (1993-2015) and national coverage. Conducting a population-based case-control study with incidence-density sampling of controls across Italy and over a 23 year time-span should have been planned in 1993 and would have been beyond feasibility and ReNaM scope. We rather exploited two existing series of controls (3). The resulting incomplete time- and spatial matching of cases and controls is a limitation of our study and has been acknowledged in our article. The analysis of case-control studies can nevertheless be accomplished in logistic models accounting for the variables of interest, in both individually and frequency matched studies (4). Furthermore, analyses restricted to (i) regions with enrolled controls, (ii) cases with definite diagnosis, (iii) incidence period 2000-2015, and (iv) subjects born before 1950 have been provided in the manuscript, confirming the strength of the association with asbestos exposure (supplemental material tables S4-7). Following Mezei et al's suggestion, we performed further sensitivity analyses by restriction to regions with controls and fitting conditional regression models using risk-sets made of combinations of age and year of birth categories (5-year classes for both). We confirmed positive associations with occupational exposure to asbestos of pericardial mesothelioma, with odds ratios (OR) (adjusted for region) of 9.16 among women [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-150] and 5.63 (95% CI 1.02-31.0) among men; for TVT mesothelioma the OR was 7.70 (95% CI 2.89-20.5). Using risk sets of age categories and introducing year of birth (5-year categories) as a covariate (dummy variables) the OR were similar: OR (adjusted for region) of 9.17 among women (95% CI 0.56-150) and 5.76 (95% CI 1.07-31.0) among men; for TVT the OR was 9.86 (95% CI 3.46-28.1). Possible bias from incomplete geographical overlap between cases and controls has been addressed in the paper (table S4) and above. I |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0355-3140 1795-990X |
DOI: | 10.5271/sjweh.3910 |