Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of studies and corresponding relative risk estimates (95% CI) included in the meta-analysis

From: Association between mesothelioma and non-occupational asbestos exposure: systematic review and meta-analysis

Author (Year) Country Design Inclusion year Fiber Case source Control source Sample size Effect estimate (95% CI) Quality Tierc
Neighborhood
 Mensi (2015) Italy CO 2000–2011 Ch, Cr Ca. registry NA 3455 6.6 (5.2, 8.3) 2
 Bayram (2013) Turkey CC 2000–2010 NR Ca. registry Registry 532 1.88 (1.63, 2.16) 2
 Tarres (2013) Spain CO 2000–2009 NR Hospital NA 24 12.92 (10.77, 15.33) 2
 Madkour (2009) Egypt CC 2003–2004 Ch Central agency Pop 4291 27.89 (3.89, 200.1) 2
 Musti (2009) Italy CC 1993–2003 Mixed Ca. registry Pop 273 5.29 (1.18, 23.74) 1
 Baumann (2007) New Caledonia CC 1984–2002 NR Ca. registry Registry 188 2.49 (0.82, 7.58) 3
 Maule (2007)a Italy CC 1987–1993 Mixed LHA Pop 272 5.1 (1.9, 13.4) 1
 Pan (2005) USA CC 1988–1997 NR Ca. registry Registry 2908 0.93 (0.90, 0.98) 1
 Metintas (2002) Turkey CO 1990–2000 Tr, Ch Ca. registry, hosp, LHA NA 1886 77.17 (51.73, 115.1) d 3
 Magnani (2000) Multi-countriesb CC 1995–1996 NR Ca. registry Pop, hosp 448 11.5 (2.84, 46.5) 1
 Rees (1999) South Africa CC 1988–1990 Am,Cr Hosp Hosp 345 19.6 (3.7, 105) 2
 Howel (1997) UK CC 1979–1991 Mixed Ca. registry Registry 345 6.6 (0.86, 59) 2
 McDonald (1980) Canada, USA CC 1960–1972 Ch Pathologic societies Hosp 490 0.25 (0.03, 2.24) 3
 Newhouse(1965) UK CC 1989–2001 Mixed Hosp Hosp 152 5.46 (1.72, 17.31) 3
Domestic
 Ferrante (2016) Italy CC 2001–2006 NR LHA Pop 348 2.4 (1.3, 4.4) 2
 Mensi (2015) Italy CO 2000–2011 Ch, Cr Ca. registry NA 3455 8.7 (6.2, 12.1) 2
 Rake (2009) UK CC 2001–2006 NR Ca. registry, hosp Pop 1420 2 (1.3, 3.2) 2
 Ferrante (2007) Italy CO 1907–1986 NR Registrar’s office NA 1780 25.19 (12.57, 45.07) 1
 Maule (2007)a Italy CC 1987–1993 Mixed LHA Pop 272 1.4 (0.7, 2.9) 1
 Welch (2005) USA CC 1989–2001 NR Ca. registry Registry 48 5.5 (1.03, 29.45) 3
 Case (2002) Canada CC 1970–1989 Ch Hosp Pop 160 4.92 (0.61, 39.87) 2
 Howel (1997) UK CC 1979–1991 Mixed Ca. registry Registry 345 5.8 (1.7, 19.2) 2
 Spirtas (1994) USA CC 1975–1980 NR Ca. registry, hosp Pop 533 1.77 (0.92, 3.4) d 2
 McDonald (1980) Canada, USA CC 1960–1972 Ch Pathologic societies Hosp 490 4.0 (0.85, 18.84) 3
 Vianna (1978) USA CC 1967–1977 NR Registrar’s office Pop 52 10 (1.42, 37.4) 3
 Newhouse(1965) UK CC 1989–2001 Mixed Hosp Hosp 152 16.75 (2.04, 137.51) 3
 Household          
 Ferrante (2016) Italy CC 2001–2006 NR LHA Pop 348 2.0 (1.2, 3.2) 2
 Baumann (2007) New Caledonia CC 1984–2002 NR Ca. registry Registry 188 1.01 (0.98, 1.04) 3
 Ferrante (2007) Italy CO 1907–1986 NR Registrar’s office NA 1780 2 (1.2, 3.2) 1
 Maule (2007)a Italy CC 1987–1993 Mixed LHA Pop 272 1.3 (0.8, 2.3) 1
 Luce (2000) New Caledonia CC 1993–1995 Tr Ca. registry Pop 305 40.9 (5.15, 325) 2
 Neighborhood/Domestic         
 Reid (2008) Australia CO 1950–2004 Ch, Cr Ca. registry, hosp NA 2552 2.08 (0.8, 5.42) 1
 Domestic/Household         
 Magnani (2000) Multi-countriesb CC 1995–1996 NR Ca. registry Pop 448 4.92 (1.78, 13.6) 1
Neighborhood/Domestic/Household
 Lacourt (2014) France CC 1998–2002 NR PNSM Pop 874 3.84 (1.27, 11.58) d 1
  1. Abbreviations: Ca. registry Cancer registry, CC Case-control, CO Cohort, Ch Chrysotile, Cr Crocidolite, Tr Tremolite, Am Amosite, NR Not Reported, M Mesothelioma, Pop Population-based, Hosp Hospital-based, LHA Local health authority, PNSM National program for mesothelioma surveillance, NA not applicable
  2. a: updated results for Magnani (2001) b:Includes Italy, Spain and Switzerland. c: Quality tiers: Tier 1 (Quality score: 8–9), Tier 2 (Quality score: 6–7), Tier 3 (Quality score; 4–5).d:calculated from the gender-specific estimates