Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38355151›Full record

SynthesisEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2024

Lung cancer risk and occupational pulmonary fibrosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Julia Krabbe, Katja Maria Steffens, Sarah Drießen, Thomas Kraus

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julia KrabbeInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany jkrabbe@ukaachen.de.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4205-9783
Katja Maria SteffensInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Sarah DrießenInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Thomas KrausInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
RWTH Aachen University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMolecular pathways found to be important in pulmonary fibrosis are also involved in cancer pathogenesis, suggesting common pathways in the development of pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is pulmonary fibrosis from exposure to occupational carcinogens an independent risk factor for lung cancer? STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases with over 100 search terms regarding occupational hazards causing pulmonary fibrosis was conducted. After screening and extraction, quality of evidence and eligibility criteria for meta-analysis were assessed. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

results52 studies were identified for systematic review. Meta-analysis of subgroups identified silicosis as a risk factor for lung cancer when investigating odds ratios for silicosis in autopsy studies (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13-1.90) and for lung cancer mortality in patients with silicosis (OR 3.21, 95% CI 2.67-3.87). Only considering studies with an adjustment for smoking as a confounder identified a significant increase in lung cancer risk (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34-1.87). However, due to a lack of studies including cumulative exposure, no adjustments could be included. In a qualitative review, no definitive conclusion could be reached for asbestosis and silicosis as independent risk factors for lung cancer, partly because the studies did not take cumulative exposure into account.

interpretationThis systematic review confirms the current knowledge regarding asbestosis and silicosis, indicating a higher risk of lung cancer in exposed individuals compared to exposed workers without fibrosis. These individuals should be monitored for lung cancer, especially when asbestosis or silicosis is present.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsOccupational DiseasesOccupational ExposurePulmonary FibrosisSilicosisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOccupational HealthPrognosisRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID38355151
PMCPMC10865097
OpenAlexW4391825663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.