No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 20, 2026.

Systematic review with meta-analysis of the epidemiological evidence in the 1900s relating smoking to lung cancer

Peter N Lee, Barbara A Forey, Katharine J Coombs

BMC Cancer · 2012 · Meta-analysis

Abstract

Background. Smoking is a known lung cancer cause, but no detailed quantitative systematic review exists. We summarize evidence for various indices.

Methods. Papers published before 2000 describing epidemiological studies involving 100+ lung cancer cases were obtained from Medline and other sources. Studies were classified as principal, or subsidiary where cases overlapped with principal studies. Data were extracted on design, exposures, histological types and confounder adjustment. RRs/ORs and 95% CIs were extracted for ever, current and ex smoking of cigarettes, pipes and cigars and indices of cigarette type and dose–response. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions investigated how relationships varied by study and RR characteristics, mainly for outcomes exactly or closely equivalent to all lung cancer, squamous cell carcinoma (“squamous”) and adenocarcinoma (“adeno”).

Results. 287 studies (20 subsidiary) were identified. Although RR estimates were markedly heterogeneous, the meta-analyses demonstrated a relationship of smoking with lung cancer risk, clearly seen for ever smoking (random-effects RR 5.50, CI 5.07-5.96) current smoking (8.43, 7.63-9.31), ex smoking (4.30, 3.93-4.71) and pipe/cigar only smoking (2.92, 2.38-3.57). It was stronger for squamous (current smoking RR 16.91, 13.14-21.76) than adeno (4.21, 3.32-5.34), and evident in both sexes (RRs somewhat higher in males), all continents (RRs highest for North America and lowest for Asia, particularly China), and both study types (RRs higher for prospective studies). Relationships were somewhat stronger in later starting and larger studies. RR estimates were similar in cigarette only and mixed smokers, and similar in smokers of pipes/cigars only, pipes only and cigars only. Exceptionally no increase in adeno risk was seen for pipe/cigar only smokers (0.93, 0.62-1.40). RRs were unrelated to mentholation, and higher for non-filter and handrolled cigarettes. RRs increased with amount smoked, duration, earlier starting age, tar level and fraction smoked and decreased with time quit. Relationships were strongest for small and squamous cell, intermediate for large cell and weakest for adenocarcinoma. Covariate-adjustment little affected RR estimates.

Conclusions. The association of lung cancer with smoking is strong, evident for all lung cancer types, dose-related and insensitive to covariate-adjustment. This emphasises the causal nature of the relationship. Our results quantify the relationships more precisely than previously.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 20, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Background

1It has been known for many years that smoking causes lung cancer. An association was clearly documented in case–control studies conducted in Germany in the 1930s, and in the United States and Great Britain in the 1950s, and was strengthened by surveys of large cohorts. This led the US Surgeon General to conclude in 1964 that “cigarette smoking is a cause of lung cancer in men, and a suspected cause of lung cancer in women”. Further reports have defined the relationship in more detail, and it has been estimated that, in the United States, 90% of male lung cancer deaths and 75%-80% of female lung cancer deaths are caused by smoking.

2While some meta-analyses of the evidence have been published in recent years none consider more than a relatively small fraction of the published evidence. We attempt to rectify this omission, though the sheer extent of the available data, and resources available, has meant limiting attention to papers published in the last century and studies involving over 100 lung cancer cases. As will be seen, this still gives us an extensive database involving almost 300 studies.

3Because the relationship of smoking to the two major types of lung cancer (squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma) is known to vary, we present detailed results relating, not only to total lung cancer risk, but also to these two histological types of lung cancer. We also present some more limited results for other lung cancer types. To provide a broad description of the relationship of smoking to lung cancer, we do not concentrate on a single primary analysis, but quantify the relationships to each of a range of indices of smoking, investigating how these relationships vary according to characteristics such as sex, age, location, study design, period considered, definition of exposure and extent of confounder adjustment. The style of this systematic review is similar to one we have recently published for smoking and COPD, chronic bronchitis and emphysema.

Methods

4Full details of the methods used are described in Additional file 1: Methods, and are summarized below. Throughout this paper, we use the term relative risk (RR) to include its various estimators, including the odds ratio and the hazard ratio.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

5Attention was restricted to epidemiological prospective or case–control studies published up to and including 1999, which involved 100 lung cancers or more, and which provided RR estimates for one or more defined major, cigarette-type or dose-related smoking indices. The “major indices” compare ever, current or ex smoking with never or non-current smoking, and refer to smoking of any product, cigarettes, pipes, cigars and combinations, or of specific types of cigarette. The “cigarette type indices” compare smokers of different types of cigarette – filter with plain, manufactured with handrolled and mentholated with non-mentholated. The “dose-related indices” concern amount smoked, age of starting to smoke, duration of smoking, duration of quitting, tar level, butt length or fraction smoked. Pack-years was not considered as it was felt more important to separate effects of extent and duration of exposure. Uncontrolled case studies were not included. There were no further exclusion criteria.

Literature searching

6Between 1997 and 2001 potentially relevant papers were sought from Medline and Emtree searches, from British Library monthly bulletins, from files on smoking and health accumulated over many years by P N Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, and from references cited in papers obtained, until ultimately no paper examined cited a paper of possible relevance not previously examined.

Identification of studies

7Relevant papers were allocated to studies, noting multiple papers on the same study, and papers reporting on multiple studies. Each study was given a unique reference code (REF) of up to 6 characters (e.g. COMSTO or LUBIN2), based on the principal author’s name and distinguishing multiple studies by the same author.

8Some studies were noted as having overlaps with other studies. To minimize problems in meta-analysis arising from double-counting of cases, overlapping studies were divided into two categories, as shown in Additional file 2: Studies. The first category involved minor overlap, which could not be disentangled, and which it was decided to ignore. The second category contains sets of studies which probably or definitely overlap. Here the set member containing the most comprehensive data (e.g. largest number of cases or longest follow-up) was called the ‘principal study’, other members being ‘subsidiary studies’ only considered in meta-analyses where the required RR was unavailable from the principal study.

Data recorded

9Relevant information was entered onto a study database and two linked RR databases. Data entry was carried out in two stages. In 1997–2002, data were entered on the first RR database for the major smoking indices, cigarette type indices, and amount smoked. In 2009–2010, data were entered on the second RR database for the remaining dose-related indices.

10The study database contains a record for each study, describing the following aspects: relevant publications; study title; study design; sexes considered; age range, race(s) and other details of the population studied; location; timing and length of follow-up; whether principal or subsidiary, with details of overlaps or links with other studies; number of cases and extent of histological confirmation; number of controls or subjects at risk; types of controls and matching factors used in case–control studies; use of proxy respondents, interview setting and response rates; confounding variables considered; availability of results by histological types; and availability of results for all smoking indices (including those indices not considered here, such as pack-years).

11The RR databases hold the detailed results, typically containing multiple records for each study. Each record is linked to the relevant study and refers to a specific RR, recording the comparison made and the results. This record includes the sex, age range, race, lung cancer type, and (for prospective studies) the follow-up period. The smoking exposure of the numerator of the RR is defined by the smoking status (ever, current or ex), smoking product (e.g. any, cigarettes, cigarettes only, pipes only) and cigarette type (e.g. any, mainly hand-rolled cigarettes, filter cigarettes only, mentholated cigarettes). Similar information is recorded about the denominator of the RR. For dose-related indices, the level of exposure is recorded. The source of the RR is also recorded, as are details on adjustment variables. Results recorded include numbers of cases for the numerator and denominator, and, for unadjusted results, numbers of controls, persons at risk or person-years at risk. The RR itself and its lower and upper 95% confidence limits (LCL and UCL) are always recorded. These may be as reported, or derived by various means (see below), with the method of derivation noted.

Identifying which RRs to enter

12RRs were entered relating to defined combinations of lung cancer type, smoking index (major, cigarette type or dose-related), confounders adjusted for, and strata, as described below.

Lung cancer type

13Results were entered for all lung cancer, for Kreyberg I (as originally presented, or by combining squamous, small and large cell carcinoma) and Kreyberg II (as originally presented, or by combining adenocarcinoma and others not in Kreyberg I), and for squamous, small, and large cell carcinoma and for adenocarcinoma separately. Additionally, the following groups were constructed if not originally presented: all lung cancer or nearest equivalent, but at least squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma; squamous cell carcinoma or nearest equivalent; adenocarcinoma or nearest equivalent.

Major and cigarette type smoking indices

14The intention was to enter RRs comparing current smokers, ever smokers or ex smokers with never or non smokers. Near-equivalent definitions were accepted when stricter definitions were unavailable, so that, for example, never smokers could include occasional smokers (or exceptionally, light smokers), while current smokers could include, and ex-smokers exclude, recent quitters. RRs were to be entered relating to smoking of defined products and, when the product related to cigarette smoking, to defined cigarette types (see also Additional file 1: Methods). If available, results (for each of current, ex and ever smoking) were entered for five comparisons: any product vs. never any product, cigarettes vs. never any product, cigarettes only vs. never any product, cigarettes vs. never cigarettes, and cigarettes only vs. never cigarettes (and also for five equivalent comparisons for current vs non smoking). Here “cigarettes” ignores whether other products (i.e. pipes and cigars) are also smoked, while “cigarettes only” excludes mixed smokers. Additionally, when the numerator related to the smoking of filter, handrolled or mentholated cigarettes, RRs were entered with the denominator defined as relating to plain, manufactured or non-mentholated smokers respectively.

Dose-related smoking indices

15RRs were entered for seven measures: amount smoked, age of starting, duration of smoking, duration of quitting, tar level, butt length and fraction smoked. RRs were expressed relative to never smokers (or near equivalent), if available, or relative to non smokers otherwise. For duration of quitting, RRs were also expressed relative to current smokers. Except for amount smoked, further RRs were entered, restricted to smokers, and expressed relative to the level expected to have the lowest risk (e.g. shortest duration or latest age started).

Confounders adjusted for

16For case–control studies, results were entered adjusted for the greatest number of potential confounding variables for which results were available, and also unadjusted (or adjusted for the smallest number of confounders). For prospective studies, results were entered adjusted for age and the greatest number of confounders, and for age only or age and the smallest number of confounders, with unadjusted results entered only if no age-adjusted results were available. These alternative RRs are subsequently referred to as “most-adjusted” and “least-adjusted”. For dose-related RRs restricted to smokers, results with “most adjustment” but without adjustment for other aspects of smoking were also entered if available.

Strata

17Three strata were considered – sex, age and race. Results were entered for males and females separately when available, with combined sex results only entered when sex-specific results were not available. Results were entered for all ages combined and for individual age groups, and for all races and for individual racial groups.

Derivation of RRs

18Adjusted RRs and their 95% CIs were entered as provided, when available. Unadjusted RRs and CIs were calculated from their 2 × 2 table, using standard methods (e.g.), noting any discrepancies between calculated values and those provided by the author. Sometimes the 2 × 2 table was constructed by summing over groups (e.g. adding current and ex smokers to obtain ever smokers) or from a percentage distribution. Various other methods were used as required to provide estimates of the RR and CI. Some more commonly used methods are summarized below, fuller details being given in Additional file 1: Methods.

Correction for zero cell

19If the 2 × 2 table has a zero cell, 0.5 was added to each cell, and the standard formulae applied.

Combining independent RRs

20RRs were combined over ℓ strata (e.g. from a 2 × 2 × ℓ table) using fixed-effect meta-analysis, giving an estimate adjusted for the stratifying variable.

Combining non-independent RRs

21The Hamling et al. method was used (e.g. to derive an adjusted RR for ever smokers from available adjusted RRs for current and ex smokers, each relative to never smokers, or to combine adjusted RRs for several histological types, each relative to a single control group).

Estimating CI from crude numbers

22If an adjusted RR lacked a CI or p-value but the corresponding 2 × 2 table was available, the CI was estimated assuming that the ratio UCL/LCL was the same as for the equivalent unadjusted RR.

Data entry and checking

23Master copies of all the papers in the study file were read closely, with relevant information highlighted to facilitate checking. Where multiple papers are available for a study, a principal publication was identified, although details described only in other publications were also recorded. Preliminary calculations and data entry were carried out by one author and checked by another, and automated checks of completeness and consistency were also conducted. RR/CIs underwent validation checks.

Meta-analyses conducted – overview

24A pre-planned series of meta-analyses was conducted for various smoking indices for each of the three main outcomes (all lung cancer, squamous cell carcinoma, and adenocarcinoma) and also for some indices for two other outcomes (large cell carcinoma and small cell carcinoma). Nearest equivalent definitions are allowed for the three main outcomes, with the terms “squamous” and “adeno” used subsequently to distinguish these results from those specifically for these cell types. Each meta-analysis was repeated, based on most-adjusted RRs and on least-adjusted RRs. For each meta-analysis conducted, combined estimates were made first for all the RRs selected, then for RRs subdivided by level of various characteristics, testing for heterogeneity between levels.

Selecting RRs for the meta-analyses

25All meta-analyses are restricted to records with available RR and CI values. The process of selecting RRs for inclusion in a meta-analysis must try to include all relevant data and to avoid double-counting. For a given analysis (e.g. of current cigarette smoking), several definitions of RR may be acceptable (e.g. cigarette smoking, or cigarette only smoking), so, for studies with multiple RRs, the one to be used is determined by a preference order defined for the meta-analysis. Preference orders may be required for smoking status, smoking product, the unexposed base, and extent of confounder adjustment. As the definitions of RR available may differ by sex (e.g. a study may provide RRs for any product smoking for males, but only for cigarette smoking for females), the RRs chosen for each sex may not necessarily have the same definition. Sexes combined results are only considered where sex-specific results are not available. Similarly RRs from a subsidiary study are only used where eligible RRs are unavailable from the principal study. When multiple preference orders are involved, the sequence of implementation may affect the selection, so preferences for the most important aspects, usually concerning smoking, are implemented first.

Carrying out the meta-analyses

26Fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using the method of Fleiss and Gross, with heterogeneity quantified by H, the ratio of the heterogeneity chisquared to its degrees of freedom, which is directly related to the statistic I2 by the formula I2 = 100 (H-1)/H. For all meta-analyses, Egger’s test of publication bias was also included.

27Meta-analyses were conducted in various sets (A to N) corresponding to the sub-sections of the results section of the paper. A full list of the analyses is given in Additional file 1: Methods.

The major smoking indices

28For the major smoking indices, the first four sets of meta-analyses relate to: A ever smoking, B current smoking, C ever smoking (but with current smoking used if ever smoking not available), referred to subsequently as “ever/current” smoking, and D ex smoking. In what is referred to as the main analysis in each set, smoking of any product is preferred by selecting RRs in the following preference order: 1. smoking of any product vs. never smoked any product; 2. smoking of cigarettes vs. never smoked any product, 3. smoking of cigarettes only vs. never smoked any product; 4. smoking of cigarettes vs. never smoked cigarettes; 5. smoking of cigarettes only vs. never smoked cigarettes; with options 6–10 the same as options 1–5 except that “never smoked” is replaced by “never smoked near equivalent”. A variant analysis prefers cigarette smoking (by changing the preference order to 4, 5, 2, 3, 1, 9, 10, 7, 8, 6). In meta-analyses of type C, a further variant analysis reverses the preference so current smoking results are preferred to those for ever smoking, referred to subsequently as “current/ever” smoking. Other variant analyses are based on RRs for specified age ranges.

29A further set of meta-analyses, E, concerns smoking of pipes and/or cigars (but not cigarettes), referred to subsequently as smoking of “pipes/cigars only”, smokers of pipes only, smokers of cigars only, and smokers of cigarettes and pipes/cigars (“mixed” smokers). Separate meta-analyses were conducted for ever smoking, current smoking, ever/current smoking, current/ever smoking and ex smoking.

The cigarette type indices

30Meta-analyses were conducted, in set F, for only filter vs. only plain, ever filter vs. only plain, only filter vs. ever plain, handrolled vs. manufactured, and mentholated vs. non-mentholated. These were only conducted for ever/current smoking, and preferring RRs for cigarettes over RRs for cigarettes only. The analyses with only filter as the numerator used the preference order of filter only, always, mainly, both, equally, and ever, while the analyses with ever filter as the numerator used the reverse preference. Similar preference orders applied to the denominators. The analyses of handrolled vs. manufactured cigarettes used the preference order of any, both, mainly, and only for handrolled, and only ever, only current, any and ever for manufactured.

The dose-related smoking indices

31For the dose-related indices, sets of meta-analyses were conducted for: G amount smoked, H age of starting to smoke, I duration of smoking, J duration of quitting compared to never smokers (or long-term ex smokers), K duration of quitting compared to current smokers (or short-term quitters), L tar level, and M butt length or fraction smoked (taking short butt length as being equivalent to a large fraction smoked). For any measure, a study typically provides a set of non-independent RRs for each dose-category, expressed relative to a common base. To avoid double-counting only one was included in any one meta-analysis. Two approaches were adopted. The first involves specifying a scheme with a number of levels of exposure (“key values”), then carrying out meta-analyses for each level in turn, expressed relative to never smokers. For an RR to be allocated to a key value, its dose-category has to include that key-value and no other. Schemes with a few, widely spaced, key values tend to involve more studies, whereas schemes with more key values, closely spaced, involve RRs from fewer studies, but ones with dose categories more closely clustered around the key value. The sets of key values used (with 999 indicating an open-ended category) were 5, 20, 45 and 1, 10, 20, 30, 40, 999 for amount smoked; 26, 18, 14 and 30, 26, 22, 18, 14, 10 for age of starting to smoke; 20, 35, 50 and 5, 20, 30, 40, 50, 999 for duration of smoking; 12, 7, 3 and 20, 12, 3 for duration of quitting vs. never; and 3, 7, 12 and 3, 12, 20 for duration of quitting vs. current. No key value analysis was conducted for tar level, or for butt length/fraction smoked. The second approach (not conducted for amount smoked) involves meta-analysing of RRs for the highest compared with the lowest categories of exposure within smokers available for each study.

Meta-regression analyses

32While full multivariable analysis of the data is considered beyond the scope of this report, meta-regression analyses were also carried out using the sets of RRs selected for the main meta-analyses for ever smoking and for current smoking. Following preliminary meta-regressions (not shown), a “fixed model” was fitted to examine the effect on the results of six different categorical variables (sex, location, start year of study, major study type, number of lung cancer cases and number of adjustment factors). Note that the number of lung cancer cases (in the study as a whole), which is referred to subsequently as “number of cases”, is used as an indicator of study size. The significance of each of these variables was estimated by an F-test based on the increase in deviance resulting from its exclusion from the basic model. A list of secondary variables was also defined (relating to more detailed aspects of location, outcome, study type and confounder adjustment, national cigarette tobacco type, the product smoked, the denominator used in the RR, use of proxy respondents, whether the study required 100% histological confirmation of lung cancer, whether the population studied worked in risky occupations, the age of the subjects, and the derivation of the RR) with the significance of adding each characteristic to the fixed model estimated by an F-test based on the increase in deviance. Fuller details are given in Additional file 1: Methods.

Additional analyses

33Additional tests of the relationship of lung cancer risk to various characteristics of interest were based on corresponding pairs of RR and CI estimates within the same study for the same definition of outcome and exposure, and deriving the ratio of the two RRs. Where the pairs involved independent sets of subjects, the variance of the ratio was also derived, and meta-analyses of the ratio were conducted. Where the pairs involved non-independent sets of subjects the numbers of ratios greater and less than 1 were compared using the sign test. Tests of independent pairs related to sex (males vs. females), age (oldest vs. youngest age group) and race (white people vs. non-white or black people). Tests of non-independent pairs related to level of adjustment (most-adjusted vs. least-adjusted), and to comparisons of product smoked (mixed smokers vs. cigarette only smokers, and vs. smokers of pipes/cigars only). Tests were always carried out for all lung cancer and ever/current smoking. For sex, additional analyses were conducted for current and for ever smoking, for squamous and adeno, and also within level of amount smoked. For level of adjustment, two sets of analyses were run. The first, relating to RRs for ever/current smoking were based on the most-adjusted/least-adjusted ratio, while the second, for highest vs. lowest RRs for age of starting to smoke, duration, years quit and tar level, compared RRs that were most- or least-adjusted for other aspects of smoking.

Software

34All data entry and most statistical analyses were carried out using ROELEE version 3.1 (available from P.N. Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, 17 Cedar Road, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5DA, UK). Some analyses were conducted using Quattro Pro 9 or Excel 2003.

Studies identified

35A total of 5,993 potentially relevant papers were identified, providing information on 287 eligible studies (Table 1).

36Table 2 presents selected details of the 287 studies while Table 3 gives the distribution of their major characteristics. Additional file 2: Studies gives fuller descriptions of the studies.

37Of the 287 studies, 267 are classified as principal, 209 (78.3%) of these being case–control studies, 52 (19.5%) prospective, 5 (1.9%) nested case–control and 1 (0.4%) case-cohort. Note that the last three study designs, where exposure was determined before diagnosis, are combined into one category in Table 3 (and the text below based on it). The other 20 studies are classified as subsidiary. Of the principal studies, 262 provide data for all lung cancer, 84 for squamous and 86 for adeno. Only rarely did these studies provide data only for squamous (1 study) or adeno (3 studies). The data come less often from case–control designs for all lung cancer (77.9%) than for squamous (86.9%) and adeno (87.2%).

38Of the 267 principal studies, 158 (59.2%) provide results for both sexes, 90 (33.7%) for males only, and 19 (7.1%) for females only. One hundred and ninety-six (73.4%) of the studies included subjects who are under 30 years old (or allowed their inclusion by having no age restriction), while only 31 (11.6%) were restricted to subjects aged 40 or more. Subjects aged 80 years or more were included by 200 (74.9%), while only 16 (6.0%) were restricted to subjects aged 60 or less. Prospective studies were much more likely than case–control studies to specify age restrictions, e.g. 62.1% vs. 16.7% for age 30 years or more, and 48.3% vs. 18.7% for age less than 80 years. Eighty-nine (33.3%) principal studies were conducted in USA or Canada, with 22 (8.2%) in the UK, 25 (9.4%) in Scandinavia, 43 (16.1%) in other parts of Europe, 37 (13.9%) in China, 18 (6.7%) in Japan, 17 (6.4%) in the rest of Asia and 16 (6.0%) elsewhere – in South or Central America, Africa or Australia. Of the 58 prospective studies, all but 12 were conducted in North America, UK or Scandinavia. Of the principal studies, 42 (15.7%) were conducted in countries where at least 75% of cigarettes smoked are made from Virginia tobacco, with 184 (68.9%) carried out where at least 75% of cigarettes are from blended tobaccos. Forty seven (17.6%) started before 1960. Studies starting after 1979 were predominantly (92.4%) case–control. Thirty-six (13.5%) involved at least 1,000 lung cancer cases. Seven (2.6%) were conducted in miners, with a further 11 (4.1%) conducted in other occupational groups with a known relationship with lung cancer. Proxy respondents were used for some subjects in 74 (27.7%), with full histological confirmation of cases reported to be carried out in 68 (25.5%).

39Most study groups (i.e. a principal study or one of its subsidiaries) provide some results for the major indices compared to never smokers, 240 (89.9%) for ever smokers, 134 (50.2%) for current smokers and 127 (47.6%) for ex smokers. Many studies provide results for smoking of any product (162 studies, 60.7%) or for cigarettes (147, 55.1%), but less do so for cigarette only smoking (55, 20.6%), smoking of pipes/cigars only (62, 23.2%), mixed smoking (29, 10.9%), or for the cigarette type indices filter/plain cigarette smoking (38, 14.2%), hand-rolled cigarette smoking (15, 5.6%), or mentholated cigarette smoking (3, 1.1%). Though dose–response data are most commonly available by amount smoked (162, 60.7%), many studies provide data by age of starting to smoke (62, 23.2%), duration (77, 28.8%), and time quit (58, 21.7%). Few studies provide data on tar level (11 studies, 4.1%), fraction smoked (9 studies, 3.4%), or butt length (2 studies, 0.7%).

Relative risks

40A total of 16,616 RRs were entered, the number recorded per study varying from 1 to 1,029. Of these, 1,266 relate to subsidiary studies. Table 4 summarizes the distribution of various characteristics of the RRs by outcome, sex, study type and location.

41Of the total of 16,616 RRs, 71.9% relate to case–control studies, and 93.8% are sex-specific. 40.2% come from North American studies, 36.8% from Europe, 16.7% from Asia, and 6.3% from other continents. 60.9% are unadjusted for potential confounding variables and 18.7% are adjusted for sex and/or age only. 70.1% are given directly or are calculated by standard methods, the rest being derived by more complex methods.

42Of the total RRs, 5,061 relate to the major smoking indices, where the denominator is never or non smoking, with 3,614 of these relating to smoking of any product or cigarettes (regardless of pipe or cigar smoking), 678 to cigarette only smoking and 769 to pipe, cigar or mixed smoking. Four hundred and forty-eight relate to cigarette type comparisons, most commonly (303 RRs) to the filter vs. plain comparison. All the 25 RRs for the mentholated/non-mentholated comparison come from North American studies, while none of those for the handrolled/manufactured comparison do. There are 10,921 RRs for dose-related indices, based mainly on 3,625 sets, 2,047 vs. never or non smoking, 1,327 vs. the low level, and 251 vs. current smoking. There are most sets for amount smoked (1,145) and least for butt length (5). For amount smoked, age of starting, duration of smoking, years quit (vs. never and vs. current) there are sufficient numbers of dose–response sets to study variation in RR by sex, study type and continent.

43None of the RRs included in the meta-analyses and meta-regressions show more than minor failures of the validation tests used, attributable to rounding errors or small imprecisions or uncertainties in estimating the RRs and CIs. Additional file 3: RRs provides further detail.

44For dose-related indices, Additional file 4: Dose Not Meta gives results originally presented in forms unsuitable for meta-analysis.

The meta-analyses and meta-regressions

45The main findings are summarized in the following sections, with tables and forest plots. Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables fully presents all the meta-analyses and meta-regressions conducted. The interested reader should first see Additional file 1: Methods, which lists the other files, and describes their content and structure.

46Findings are generally presented for three outcomes, referred to as “all lung cancer”, “squamous” or “adeno”. These outcomes are defined in the Methods section, and also in the footnotes to the tables, and allow the inclusion of results based on alternative similar definitions. (Note that the terms “squamous cell carcinoma” and “adenocarcinoma” are only used when reference is made to results specifically for the particular cell type).

A. Risk from ever smoking

47Figures 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 (all lung cancer), Figures 6, 7 (squamous) and Figure 8, 9 (adeno) present the results of the main meta-analyses for ever smoking any product (or cigarette smoking for studies without RRs for any product), based on most-adjusted RRs. Table 5 presents additional results subdivided by level of certain characteristics, while Table 6 presents results of some alternative meta-analyses of ever smoking. From these findings, various observations can be made.

48First, the RRs for all three outcomes are markedly heterogeneous. As shown in Table 5, H is estimated as 22.84 for all lung cancer, 5.17 for squamous and 8.78 for adeno (p < 0.001). Individual RRs vary up to 125.27 for all lung cancer (study STUCKE for males), 92.66 for squamous (ABRAHA/males), and 34.45 for adeno (SCHWAR/males). Based on random-effects estimates, a positive association is seen, strongest for squamous (RR 10.47, 95% CI 8.88-12.33, based on 102 RRs), but also clearly evident for all lung cancer (5.50, 5.07-5.96, n = 328) and adeno (2.84, 2.41-3.35, n = 107). Although the strength of association varies markedly by study, the consistency of direction is clear, with only two of the all lung cancer RRs, none of the 102 squamous RRs, and nine of the 107 adeno RRs below 1.0.

49As shown in Table 6, the overall estimates for each outcome were virtually unchanged by using least-adjusted rather than most-adjusted estimates. They were slightly increased by restricting attention to estimates using a more precise outcome definition, the random-effects estimates changing to 5.59 (5.15-6.07) for the 317 estimates specifically for all lung cancer, 11.56 (9.68-13.81) for the 74 estimates specifically for squamous cell carcinoma, and 2.99 (2.49-3.58) for the 87 estimates specifically for adenocarcinoma. The overall estimates for each outcome were virtually unchanged when RRs for ever smoking cigarettes were preferred to RRs for ever smoking any product. This is partly due to many studies providing only one type of RR, so that for all lung cancer, for example, 250 of the 328 RRs are common to both meta-analyses. A much smaller number of estimates were available for cigarette only smoking; RRs from these were slightly higher: 6.45 (5.41-7.70, n = 54) for all lung cancer, 11.50 (7.47-17.69, n = 11) for squamous, and 2.87 (1.49-5.55, n = 11) for adeno. Estimates were also extracted specifically for populations of age <56, 50–70 or 65+ years (with age determined at baseline for prospective studies). As shown in Table 6, data were rather limited for squamous and adeno, particularly for older populations. For all lung cancer, the three RRs: 6.57 (4.94-8.74, n = 38) for age <56 years, 6.46 (4.99-8.35, n = 31) for age 50–70 years, and 5.48 (4.59-6.55, n = 37) for age 65+ years were all consistent with the overall RR of 5.50, with no clear trend.

50Returning to the main meta-analysis (most-adjusted and preferring ever smoking any product), there is a large variation between RRs in the weight they contribute to the analysis. This is very marked for all lung cancer. Here the 328 estimates provided a combined weight of 19,346 (mean 59.0), but the male and female estimates from study LIU4 together contributed a weight of 9,846, 50.9% of the total. Omitting these two estimates substantially reduced the heterogeneity, H falling from 22.84 to 12.54. The next largest weights were 1,550 in study STOCKW (sexes combined), 443 in BROWN2 (males) and 428 in BROWN2 (females). For squamous, the total weight was 1,000 for the 102 RRs (mean 9.8). The largest contributors to this were 164 for BROWN2/males, 90 for BROWN2/females, 52 for LUBIN2/males and 47 for LUBIN2/females, together contributing 35% of the total weight. For adeno, the total weight was 1,514 for the 107 RRs (mean 14.1). Again, BROWN2 and LUBIN2 were the largest contributors, providing, respectively, 24% and 6% of the total weight.

51In investigating sources of heterogeneity, variation was studied firstly using a univariable approach, the results for the characteristics considered in Table 5 being summarized below, based on the random-effects estimates.

Sex

52For all three outcomes, RRs were always somewhat lower for females than for males or for sexes combined, though the variation by sex was not significant (p ≥ 0.1) for squamous.

Location

53For all three outcomes, RRs were lower from studies conducted in Europe and Asia than from studies conducted in North America. While for all lung cancer and adeno RRs were noticeably lower in Asia than in Europe, this difference was not evident for squamous. The difference in RRs by continent was very marked and highly significant (p < 0.001) for all lung cancer and adeno, but less marked, though still significant (p < 0.01) for squamous.

Start year of study

54For all lung cancer and squamous, variation by start year was not significant (p ≥ 0.05) although there was some tendency for RRs to be higher in more recent studies. For adeno, the variation was significant (p < 0.01) but there was no clear trend.

Study type

55For all three outcomes, RRs were somewhat lower for case–control studies than for prospective studies (or other study designs where the smoking data were collected before lung cancer diagnosis). However, the difference was never statistically significant (p ≥ 0.05).

National cigarette tobacco type

56For all three outcomes, there was significant (p < 0.01 or< 0.001) variation. This was mainly due to low estimates in the “other” group, which mainly included results from China. For all lung cancer, RRs for Virginia (6.24, 5.16-7.54, n = 50) and blended (6.30, 5.79-6.87) were quite similar. For squamous and adeno, there were limited results for Virginia, and no clear difference from blended was evident.

Any proxy use

57There was some evidence that RRs were higher where proxy respondents were used for squamous (p < 0.05) and adeno (p < 0.1), but not for all lung cancer.

Full histological confirmation

58RR estimates were somewhat higher where full histological confirmation of diagnosis was a study requirement, but this was only significant at p < 0.05 for all lung cancer.

Number of cases

59Some tendency for RRs to increase with increasing number of cases was evident for all three outcomes, but variation in number of cases was only significant for all lung cancer (p < 0.01).

Smoking product

60The analyses in Table 5 are based on a preference order of any product, cigarettes (ignoring other products) and cigarettes only. For all lung cancer, where 205 of the 328 estimates were for any product, 114 were for cigarettes and 9 for cigarettes only, there was no evidence that the RRs included varied by smoking product. For squamous and adeno (both p < 0.001), however, RRs were lowest for smoking any product, intermediate for cigarettes, and highest for cigarettes only (though based on only two RRs for cigarettes only for each outcome).

Unexposed base

61RRs were somewhat higher where the unexposed base group was never cigarettes than when it was never any product, though this was only significant (p < 0.05) for adeno. This result is somewhat counter-intuitive, as lower RRs might be expected where the base (never cigarettes) includes some smokers (pipe/cigar only), and probably arises from the strong correlation between the definitions of smoking product and unexposed base. Two combinations – any product vs. never any product (n = 203) and cigarettes vs. never cigarettes (n = 90) – form a large proportion of the total RRs (with any product vs never cigarettes not a valid possibility).

Number of adjustment factors

62There was no evidence that RR estimates varied by whether they were adjusted for 0, 1 or 2+ potential confounding variables.

63The full meta-analysis (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables) also includes results by levels of some other characteristics. In an attempt to evaluate the independent role of a whole range of characteristics, preliminary meta-regression analyses were conducted for each outcome (results not shown). As a result, it was decided to present findings for a fixed model involving six major characteristics (see Table 7), test the effect of each by deleting each of the six individually from the fixed model (and also by allowing each to enter a step-wise model in order of significance), and test the effect of a range of other characteristics by adding each individually into the fixed model (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables). The main conclusions to be drawn from these analyses are summarized below.

64For all lung cancer, by far the strongest source of variation was location, with the overall heterogeneity reduced from 22.84 per d.f. to 7.02 per d.f. after including location only into the model. As noted earlier this was mainly due to relatively high RRs in North America and low RRs in Asia. Other clear effects were also associated with start year of study (p < 0.001, higher risks in later studies, much more clearly evident than in the univariable analyses in Table 5), study type (p < 0.01, higher risks in prospective studies) and number of cases (p < 0.001, higher risks in larger studies). There was no significant effect of sex, and the weakly significant (p < 0.05) effect for number of adjustment factors was associated with an erratic pattern, with lower RRs where the number of factors was 1, and higher RRs where it was 0 or 2+. The heterogeneity for the fixed model including all the six characteristics included in Table 7 was 4.72 per d.f., with the model explaining 80.5% of the overall variation between the RRs. Inspection of standardized residuals revealed eight estimates where the value was outside the range +/− 2.5 SEs: MILLS/males (RR 1.33, fitted 3.35), LOMBA2/females (RR 1.33, fitted 5.07), TIZZAN/males (RR 1.93, fitted 3.50), WANG4/males (RR 1.16, fitted 2.01), PERNU/males (RR 8.93, fitted 4.37), LUBIN2/males (RR 8.50, fitted 5.47), BOFFET/males (RR 14.20, fitted 7.78) and JUSSAW/males (RR 16.83, fitted 3.77). Only two other characteristics studied significantly (p < 0.05) improved the fit of the model, both related to study location. One was a variable subdividing “Other Europe” (i.e. other than UK and Scandinavia) into five smaller regions, with risk relatively low in the Balkans (Greek and Turkish studies) and relatively high in multiregional studies compared with the rest, and the other a variable subdividing “Other Asia” (i.e. other than China or Japan) into three smaller regions, with risk higher in India compared to Hong Kong and the rest of Asia (Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore and South Korea). No independent effect was evident for national cigarette tobacco type. Additional analysis (data not shown) confirmed the strong independent effect of start year of study separately within studies conducted in North America, Europe and Asia, though the tendency for higher RRs in more recent studies was stronger in North America than in Europe, and the pattern of variation was more erratic for Asia. It also confirmed the strong independent effects of location and start year of study separately for males and for females.

65For squamous, start year of study was the most important factor, on its own reducing the heterogeneity from 5.17 to 4.33 per d.f. (p < 0.001). Other significant characteristics included location (p < 0.001), with RRs high in North America and low in China, and number of cases (p < 0.05), with higher RRs in larger studies. Number of adjustment factors was also significant (p < 0.05), but the pattern was erratic and not the same as for all lung cancer. Though the pattern of results by study type was similar to that for all lung cancer, this characteristic did not contribute significantly to the model. The heterogeneity for the fixed model (Table 7) was 3.18 per d.f., the model explaining 49.9% of the overall variation. Two standardized residuals were outside the range +/− 2.5 SEs: STAYNE/males (RR 3.47, fitted 10.50) and LUBIN2/males (RR 16.66, fitted 8.41). Two other characteristics significantly improved the model fit. One was national cigarette tobacco type, with RRs higher where flue-cured Virginia tobacco was smoked, than where blended tobacco was smoked. Also, RRs were higher (p < 0.01) where they had been derived by a relatively complex method (see Methods) than where they were as reported originally, or derived by more standard methods.

66For adeno, location was the most important factor, on its own reducing the heterogeneity from 8.78 to 4.36 per d.f. (p < 0.001), with the pattern of results (RRs high in North America and low in Asia) similar to that for all lung cancer. As for all lung cancer, there was variation by start year of study (p < 0.05) and number of cases (p < 0.05), with RRs higher for recent and larger studies. RRs were again higher for prospective studies, but here the difference was not significant (p ≥ 0.05). Here, variation by sex was significant (p < 0.05) with RRs higher for males than females, but number of adjustment factors was not (p ≥ 0.05). The heterogeneity for the fixed model (Table 7) was 3.27 per d.f., the model explaining 69.5% of the overall variation. Two standardized residuals were outside the range +/− 2.5 SEs: LOMBA2/females (RR 0.53, fitted 2.32) and WYNDER6/females (RR 13.99 fitted 6.22). Four other characteristics significantly improved the model fit. One was “Other Asia” (p < 0.05) where RRs were high in India (based on a single RR from JUSSAW) and relatively low in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore and South Korea. National cigarette tobacco type was also significant (p < 0.05), with RRs for blended higher than for Virginia, opposite to the finding for squamous. RRs were also lower where there was any use of proxy respondents (p < 0.05). Also, RRs varied (p < 0.001) by the detailed definition of adenocarcinoma used. This appeared to be mainly because of a low RR for “not squamous or undifferentiated”, a definition used only for LOMBA2/females, where the standardized residual of −3.721 SEs was the largest for any RR (see also above).

67The fixed model (Table 7) considered how RR estimates varied by six main characteristics and additional analyses (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables) tested whether adding in further characteristics improved the model fit. Characteristics which did not improve the fit for any of the three outcomes considered included whether there was adjustment for specific factors (such as age), the age of the subjects studied, the definition of smoking product, the definition of the unexposed base, whether the study was conducted in a population working in a risky occupation, and whether the study procedures required full histological confirmation.

B. Risk from current smoking

68Figures 10, 11, 12 (all lung cancer), Figure 13 (squamous) and Figure 14 (adeno) present the results of the main meta-analyses for current smoking of any product. As before, RRs for smoking of cigarettes are used if RRs for any product smoking are not available, and RRs are most-adjusted. For prospective studies, current smoking refers to smoking status as at baseline. Table 8 presents additional results by level of the same set of characteristics considered in Table 5, while Table 9 presents results of alternative meta-analyses of current smoking.

69As for ever smoking, the RRs for all three outcomes are heterogeneous (p < 0.001), with the largest estimates seen being 104.50 for all lung cancer (STUCKE/males), 78.91 for squamous (CPSII/females), and 21.70 for adeno (OSANN/males). The random-effects estimates (all lung cancer 8.43, 95% CI 7.63-9.31, n = 195; squamous 16.91, 13.14-21.76, n = 41; adeno 4.21, 3.32-5.34, n = 44) are all clearly positive, larger than the corresponding estimates for ever smoking, and also show a stronger relationship with squamous than adeno. Similarly to ever smoking, the individual RRs are virtually all above 1.0, though varying substantially. The estimates are again little affected (Table 9) by preferring least, rather than most, adjusted RRs, by restricting to a more precise outcome definition, or by preferring RRs for current smoking of cigarettes to those for current smoking of any product. Again estimates based specifically on cigarette only smoking were slightly higher than those shown in Table 8 – 9.52 (7.89-11.49, n = 38) for all lung cancer, 20.85 (14.84-29.29, n = 8) for squamous, and 6.05 (3.69-9.92, n = 7) for adeno. More so than in Table 6, data by age were rather limited for squamous and adeno. For all lung cancer estimates were 6.57 (4.68-9.23, n = 25) for age <56 years, 9.62 (7.10-13.05, n = 24) for age 50–70 years, and 9.07 (6.83-12.04, n = 27) for age 65+ years, no clear trend being evident. Table 9 also includes results for the comparison current vs. non-current smokers. The RRs here (3.75, 3.48-4.03 for all lung cancer; 4.71, 3.84-5.79 for squamous; 2.46, 2.07-2.93 for adeno) were markedly lower than the corresponding estimates for current vs. never smokers, reflecting the increased risk in ex-smokers described later (see section D below).

70For the main meta-analysis, the studies contributing most to the total weight for current smoking for all lung cancer were STOCKW/sexes combined (17.8% of the total of 6,750) followed by BROWNS/males (6.0%) and BROWNS/females (5.4%). BROWNS was the major contributor for both squamous and adeno, with the two sex-specific results contributing 36.0% of the total weight of 646 for squamous, and 30.0% of the total weight of 1,017 for adeno. The huge LIU4 study did not provide results for current smoking.

71For the characteristics considered in Table 8, the pattern of variation has a number of similarities to that for ever smoking in Table 5. Thus, as for ever smoking, RRs for all three outcomes tend to be higher for males, for North American studies, and where the unexposed base is never cigarettes, and smaller for older studies and smaller studies, with no clear variation by extent of adjustment. A tendency for RRs to be higher where data may be reported by proxy respondents seems somewhat stronger for current smoking, although based on few estimates for squamous and adeno. A tendency for RRs to be higher where the smoking product is cigarettes or cigarettes only than when it is any product is also evident, though not for squamous, whereas it was seen most clearly in squamous for ever smoking. There is also some indication that RRs are higher in prospective studies, though interestingly not for all lung cancer. Whereas for ever smoking, RRs for studies requiring full histological confirmation were higher than for those that did not for all three outcomes, the tendency was in the reverse direction for squamous and adeno for current smoking. For national cigarette tobacco type, current smoking RRs for squamous and adeno are virtually all for blended, so are unhelpful. For all lung cancer, RRs are quite similar for Virginia and blended, the significant (p < 0.001) variation shown in Table 8 arising because of the low RRs in the “Other” group, mainly for China.

72As for ever smoking, meta-regression analyses were conducted to give further insight, the results from the same fixed model including six characteristics being summarized in Table 10. Based on these results and those for other characteristics in Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables various conclusions can be drawn.

73For all lung cancer, as was the case for ever smoking RRs, by far the strongest source of variation in current smoking RRs was location with relatively high risks in North America and low risks in Asia. The overall heterogeneity reduced from 13.76 per d.f. to 6.73 per d.f. after including location only into the model. Higher risks were also seen in the fixed model in more recent studies (p < 0.001) and for males than females (p < 0.01). There was some evidence (p < 0.1) of higher RRs in larger studies and in prospective studies, but no association was seen with the number of adjustment factors. The heterogeneity for the fixed model shown in Table 10 was 4.68 per d.f., with the model explaining 69.3% of the overall variation between the current smoking RRs. Four standardized residuals were outside the range +/− 2.5 SEs: BROWN2/males (RR 11.30, fitted 15.86), TIZZAN/males (RR 1.90, fitted 3.68), CPSI/females (RR 3.20, fitted 6.59) and KREUZE/males aged 55–69 (RR 41.86, fitted 11.85). No other characteristic significantly improved the fit when added to the fixed model. Additional analysis (data not shown) confirmed the effect of start year of study separately for North America and Europe (though no such relationship was seen in Asia) and also confirmed that the effects of location and start year of study were evident separately for males and for females.

74For squamous and adeno, numbers of current smoking RRs (41 and 44 respectively) were much lower than those for all lung cancer, with no data for China or the United Kingdom, or for national cigarette type “other”. For squamous, only two characteristics in the fixed model (Table 10) were significant, and then only at p < 0.05, and one of these was number of adjustment factors, where the pattern of response was erratic. Location was the other, with RRs again highest in North America and lowest in Asia. There were no estimates with large standardized residuals, and no other characteristic improved the model fit.

75For adeno, three of the characteristics considered in Table 10 contributed significantly to the model, sex (p < 0.001), location (p < 0.001) and start year of study (p < 0.05), with the direction of effect similar to that noted earlier for ever smoking. There were no large standardized residuals, and the only additional characteristic which improved the model fit (p < 0.05) related to somewhat lower RRs being seen for studies with full histological confirmation.

76For none of the three outcomes did characteristics associated with detailed location, national cigarette tobacco type, the precise definition of the outcome, adjustment for specific factors, the definitions of smoking product or of the unexposed base, whether the study was conducted in a population working in a risky occupation or whether proxy respondents were used, add significantly to the model.

C. Risk from ever or current smoking

77In an attempt to incorporate data from a greater number of studies, additional analyses were carried out for ever/current smoking and for current/ever smoking. The meta-analysis RRs are shown in Table 11. The number of studies included increased from 236 to 242 for all lung cancer, from 73 to 78 for squamous and from 75 to 81 for adeno, compared with Table 5. Note that the slightly higher number of RR estimates in the current/ever analysis arises from inclusion there of more sex-specific results.

78As many of the RRs are common between the specific ever smoking analyses in Table 5 and the ever/current smoking analyses in Table 11, the meta-analysis RRs tend to be quite similar. However those for current/ever smoking are intermediate between those specifically for ever smoking (Table 5) and those specifically for current smoking (Table 8). For example, for all lung cancer, random-effects estimates are 5.50 (95% CI 5.07-5.96, n = 328) for ever smoking, 5.48 (5.07-5.93, n = 342) for ever/current smoking, 6.20 (5.68-6.77, n = 344) for current/ever smoking, and 8.43 (7.63-9.31, n = 195) for current smoking. The pattern of RRs by level of the characteristics studied for both ever/current and current/ever smoking tends to be quite similar to that for the specific analyses. Results for ever or current smoking by level of selected characteristics are therefore only presented in Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables.

D. Risk from ex smoking

79Figures 15, 16, 17 (all lung cancer), Figure 18 (squamous) and Figure 19 (adeno) present the results of the main meta-analyses for ex smoking of any product (or cigarettes if any product was not available), based on most-adjusted RRs. Some results by levels of characteristics are shown in Table 12.

80Again the RRs are markedly heterogeneous (p < 0.001 for all three outcomes), ranging up to 135.69 for all lung cancer (STUCKE/males), 22.90 for squamous (OSANN/males) and 13.10 for adeno (OSANN/males). The random-effects estimates (all lung cancer 4.30, 95% CI 3.93-4.71, n = 182, squamous 8.74, 6.94-11.01, n = 33, and adeno 2.85, 2.20-3.70, n = 34), though all clearly positive, are smaller than the corresponding estimates for current smoking. Individual RRs are only very occasionally below 1.0 and never significantly so. Estimates are little affected by using the more specific definition of each outcome, preferring least-adjusted RRs to most-adjusted RRs, or preferring RRs for ever smoking cigarettes to those for ever smoking any product. RRs for ever smoking cigarettes only were too few for useful analysis for squamous and adeno, but for all lung cancer were similar to those for ever smoking any product. Fuller details are given in the Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables.

81For the main meta-analysis of ex smoking, the studies contributing most to the total weight for all lung cancer were STOCKW/sexes combined (22.4% of the total of 4,739), followed by BROWNS/males (8.5%) and BROWNS/females (6.5%). BROWNS was the major contributor for both squamous and adeno, with the two sex-specific results contributing 49.4% of the total weight of 446 for squamous, and 45.2% of the total weight of 619 for adeno.

82For the characteristics considered in Table 12 the sources of variation for all lung cancer are generally quite similar to those seen for ever smoking in Table 5 and for current smoking in Table 8. Thus, RRs are higher for males, for North America, for more recent studies and for larger studies. Interestingly RRs are clearly lower for prospective than for case–control studies. Numbers of ex smoking RRs are less for squamous (33) and for adeno (34) than for all lung cancer (182), but nevertheless some associations are evident in relation to location for adeno, to study type for squamous, to number of adjustment factors for adeno, and to number of cases, smoking product and unexposed base for both squamous and adeno. Meta-regression analyses were not attempted for ex smoking.

E. Risk from smoking specific products compared to smoking of any product

83Table 13 summarizes the results of meta-analyses for all lung cancer for cigarette only smokers, smokers of pipes/cigars only, smokers of pipes only, and smokers of cigars only. In each analysis, the base is never smokers of any product. The results for ever smoking of pipes/cigars only are also shown in Figure 20.

84For ever smoking, current smoking and ex smoking the random-effects RRs are similarly elevated for pipes/cigars, pipes only and cigars only, but to a markedly lesser extent than for cigarettes only. As for cigarette smoking, RRs for pipe and cigar smoking are clearly higher for current smokers than for ex smokers.

85Available results for squamous and adeno are limited, and mainly for ever smoking. For pipe and/or cigar smoking, the RR for squamous (3.72, 95% CI 1.95-7.10, n = 8) is somewhat higher than that for all lung cancer (2.92, 2.38-3.57, n = 38), but the RR for adeno is not elevated (0.93, 0.62-1.40, n = 7). The lack of association of adeno with pipe and cigar smoking is also evident in the RRs for pipes only (0.50, 0.23-1.10, n = 4) and for cigars only (0.55, 0.11-2.88, n = 3).

86The results for pipe and cigar smoking mainly apply to males, as the few available estimates for females have wide variability. The increased risk in smokers of pipes and cigars is evident in each location studied, though data for Asia are extremely sparse. Unlike for cigarettes, higher RRs are seen for Scandinavia (7.02, 4.72-10.44, n = 6) and for Other Europe (5.17, 2.91-9.19, n = 8) than for North America (2.27, 1.79-2.89, n = 26) or the UK (4.32, 2.73-6.84, n = 11). These results are for ever/current smoking, with the full results given in Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables.

87Table 13 also shows results for lung cancer for mixed smokers. For ever, current and ex smoking, the random-effects RRs are slightly, but not significantly, higher than those for smokers of cigarettes only. Available results for squamous and adeno are again limited, and mainly for ever smokers. The RRs for squamous (9.78, 4.94-19.35, n = 6) and for adeno (2.48, 1.25-4.95, n = 6) do not clearly differ from the RRs for squamous (11.09, 7.19-17.09, n = 10) and for adeno (2.63, 1.32-5.24, n = 10) for smokers of cigarettes only.

F. Risk by type of cigarette smoked

88Table 14 summarizes results by type of cigarette smoked. For filter and plain cigarette smoking results are shown for three comparisons, including, for studies where there is a choice, the nearest available equivalents to only filter vs. only plain (with results for all lung cancer also shown in Figure 21), ever filter vs. only plain, and only filter vs. ever plain. Results are also shown for the comparison of handrolled and manufactured cigarette smoking, and for mentholated vs. non-mentholated cigarette smoking, with results for all lung cancer also shown in Figures 22 and 23.

89The random-effects RRs show a reduction in risk for only filter vs. only plain cigarette smoking that is significant for all lung cancer (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.61-0.78, n = 42), and squamous (0.52, 0.40-0.68, n = 13), though not for adeno (0.84, 0.66-1.08, n = 10). The alternative comparisons for filter and plain, where only a third to a half of the RRs included actually differ, show clear reductions for all lung cancer and squamous associated with filter cigarette smoking, though no difference for adeno (see Table 14). The reductions for all lung cancer and squamous are evident in both sexes and all continents (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables).

90The risk associated with handrolled smoking is greater than that with manufactured cigarette smoking, with RRs of 1.29 (1.12-1.49, n = 20) for all lung cancer and 1.62 (1.18-2.21, n = 5) for squamous. The RR of 2.09 (0.83-5.25, n = 4) for adeno is based on very heterogeneous estimates, varying from 0.43 to 8.76, and allows no clear conclusion. As results for females are limited, and have wide variability, the conclusions mainly apply to males. The estimated RR for all lung cancer is greater than 1 in all locations studied, though not always statistically significant. However, there are no data from North America.

91Data on mentholated cigarette smoking are limited, particularly by histological type. For all lung cancer, the RR of 0.98 (0.80-1.20, n = 6) is consistent with no effect of mentholation on risk, five RR estimates close to or below 1.0, counterbalancing one reported significant increase in males for study KAISER of 1.45 (1.03-2.02). There is some evidence (p < 0.05) of heterogeneity by sex with estimates of 1.15 (0.93-1.43, n = 3) for males, and 0.78 (0.63-0.98, n = 3) for females.

G. Risk by amount smoked

92Table 15 summarizes the results of meta-analyses using RRs categorized by number of cigarettes (or cigarette equivalents) smoked per day and based on data for ever/current smoking and for smoking of any product (or cigarettes if not available). These are based on those 140 studies for all lung cancer, 36 for squamous, and 34 for adeno which provided data that could be used in the meta-analyses. For all three outcomes, results are shown for one of the sets of “key values” (see Methods). For all lung cancer, squamous and adeno, a clear increase is seen for RRs for categories including 5, but not 20, cigarettes/day, with the meta-analysis RR increasing monotonically with increasing amount smoked. Random-effects estimates for categories including 45, but not 20 cigarettes/day, are 13.69 (11.80-15.89, n = 128) for all lung cancer, 27.65 (20.42-37.44, n = 37) for squamous and 4.80 (3.29-7.01, n = 34) for adeno. The increase with amount smoked is also clearly evident when an alternative set of key values (1, 10, 20, 30, 40, 999) is used, though numbers of available RRs are quite sparse for the higher key values, when least-adjusted RRs are considered, and in both sexes (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables). The key value analyses do not use results for all the dose–response data available, as a number of the studies use broad dose–response categories (such as 1–20 or 20+ cigs/day) which span more than one of the key values. Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables also includes results for alternative definitions of smoking status and product smoked, which show a similarly clear dose–response. For example, for current smoking of any product, the RRs for squamous rise from 9.92 (7.41-13.28, n = 8) for key value 5 cigs/day to 39.16 (23.67-64.79, n = 12) for key value 45 cigs/day. Additional file 4: Dose Not Meta also includes available results for some other studies which present dose–response data in a form that cannot readily be included in the meta-analyses (e.g. where the only available comparison is with an inappropriate base group). These results do not appear inconsistent with those summarized in Table 15.

93Dose–response by amount smoked was investigated for pipe and cigar smoking, but the number of estimates available was small, and referred only to males. However, there was some evidence of dose–response. Thus for all lung cancer, one can compare RRs for cigar only smoking for the highest (8.21, 4.36-15.49, n = 6) and lowest exposure groups (1.84, 1.22-2.79, n = 5), and can also compare RRs for pipe only smoking for the highest (5.99, 3.57-10.04, n = 9) and lowest exposure groups (3.68, 2.75-4.93, n = 8).

H. Risk by age of starting to smoke

94Table 16 summarizes meta-analysis results for age of starting to smoke based on data for ever/current smoking and for smoking of any product (or cigarettes if not available). Random-effects RRs for earliest compared to latest starting, and selecting results least-adjusted for other aspects of smoking, are significantly elevated for all lung cancer (2.35, 2.08-2.65, n = 73), squamous (2.23, 1.66-2.98, n = 18) and adeno (1.99, 1.48-2.67, n = 17). Alternatively selecting results most-adjusted for other aspects of smoking, the RR for all lung cancer is 2.20 (1.96-2.47, n = 73). The increase in risk with earlier starting is consistent with the results of the key value analyses, with, for example, random-effects estimates relative to never smokers for squamous rising from 11.06 (6.87-17.81, n = 14) for categories including 26 years but not including 18 years to 31.07 (17.93-53.85, n = 6) for categories including 14, but not 18 years. As seen in Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables, a similar pattern is generally seen for other definitions of smoking status and product smoked, although data for smokers of pipes and/or cigars are very limited.

I. Risk by duration of smoking

95Table 17 is laid out similarly to Table 16 and also presents results for ever/current smoking. Random-effects RRs for longest compared to shortest duration of smoking, and selecting results least adjusted for other aspects of smoking, are significantly elevated for all lung cancer (3.56, 2.90-4.35, n = 76), squamous (3.93, 3.10-4.97, n = 27) and adeno (2.64, 2.04-3.43, n = 23). Alternatively selecting results most adjusted for other aspects of smoking, the RR for all lung cancer is 3.00 (2.57-3.49, n = 77). The increase in risk with longer duration is consistent with the results of the key value analyses, with, for example, random-effects estimates for all lung cancer rising from 2.48 (2.09-2.95, n = 55) for categories including 20 years but not including 35 years to 10.13 (7.66-13.39, n = 45) for categories including 50, but not 35 years. A clear trend of risk with increasing duration is also seen for other definitions of smoking status and product smoked (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables). Data for pipe and cigar smoking are limited, though even so there is some evidence of a trend. Thus, for all lung cancer longest to shortest RRs are elevated, both in smokers of pipes only (4.32, 1.57-11.89, n = 5) and smokers of cigars only (2.43, 1.02-5.79, n = 3).

J. Risk by duration of quitting (vs. never smoking)

96Table 18 presents results for duration of quitting (vs. never smoking) based on results for smoking of any product (or cigarettes if not available). Random-effects RRs for shortest compared to longest duration of quitting, selecting results least adjusted for other aspects of smoking, are significantly elevated for all lung cancer (3.97, 3.32-4.75, n = 65), squamous (6.22, 3.75-10.30, n = 14) and adeno (3.32, 1.98-5.58, n = 14). Alternatively selecting results most adjusted for other aspects of smoking, the RR for all lung cancer is 3.61 (3.04-4.28, n = 65). The increase in risk with shorter duration of quitting is consistent with the results of the key value analyses, with, for example, random-effects estimates relative to never smokers for adeno rising from 2.10 (1.49-2.94, n = 12) for categories including 12 years but not including 7 years to 6.73 (3.46-13.12, n = 6) for categories including 3, but not 7 years. A clear trend of risk with increasing duration of quitting is also seen for cigarette smoking (or any product if not available), and for cigarette only smoking (see Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables). Data for pipe and cigar smoking were too limited for reliable conclusions.

K. Risk by duration of quitting (vs. current smoking)

97For duration of quitting compared to current smoking the number of data sets available are somewhat less than the corresponding number for duration of quitting compared to never smoking. Results included in the longest vs. shortest analysis shown in Table 19 are generally the inverse of those in the shortest vs. longest analysis in Table 18 (exceptions arising for studies which combined current smokers and recent quitters of more than 2 years). While the key value analyses shown in Table 19 echo the trends shown in Table 18, they also show that for shorter term quitting (categories including 3 but not 7 years) there is no evidence of a decline in risk from quitting. Thus the RRs for all lung cancer (0.95, 0.84-1.08, n = 41) and adeno (1.02, 0.85-1.22, n = 6) are close to 1.00, and the RR for squamous (1.15, 1.03-1.28, n = 6) is slightly elevated. Longer quit durations are, however, clearly associated with a reduction in risk. For all lung cancer, almost 40% of the RRs used in the key value analyses included short-term quitters (of up to 2 years) in the current smoker base. No difference was seen between those RRs and those with a more precisely defined current smoker base.

L. Risk by tar level

98Due to the variety of different methods of quantifying tar levels, only highest vs. lowest analyses have been carried out. No data were available by histological type, and all data relate to cigarette smoking. For all lung cancer and for ever/current smoking of cigarettes the 14 available estimates, from 9 studies, showed some evidence of heterogeneity (H = 2.29, p < 0.01). However, 12 of the estimates showed a higher risk in the higher tar group, and the random-effect estimate (1.42, 1.18-1.71) confirmed the relationship between risk and tar level. The increase was evident for males (1.29, 1.08-1.53, n = 7) and females (1.48, 1.05-2.09, n = 6). There was no evidence of heterogeneity by any specific characteristic, including extent of adjustment, 7 of the 14 estimates being adjusted for one or more of aspects of smoking. These results are based on RRs that are selected as being least adjusted for other aspects of smoking. Alternatively, using RRs selected as most adjusted for other aspects of smoking, the overall estimate was 1.34 (1.16-1.56, n = 14).

M. Risk by butt length and fraction smoked

99All the available data relate to cigarette smoking. As the number of available estimates were quite limited, particularly for butt length, they have been combined into a single analysis including RRs for shortest vs. longest butt lengths and for greatest vs. smallest fraction smoked, and including results for ever smoking and current smoking. The combined estimates were 1.43 (1.14-1.79, n = 11) for all lung cancer, 1.39 (1.04-1.86, n = 7) for squamous, and 1.30 (1.07-1.58, n = 6) for adeno. There was some evidence of heterogeneity for all lung cancer (H = 2.29, p < 0.05) and for squamous (H = 2.96, p <0.01), though not for adeno (H = 0.75), but a clear majority (18/24 = 75.0%) of the estimates indicated a higher risk associated with smoking more of the cigarette.

N. Further analyses by histological type

100The results so far have been restricted to all lung cancer, squamous or adeno. Table 20 gives results for ever, current and ever/current smoking of any product (or cigarettes if not available) for small cell carcinoma and large cell carcinoma, with corresponding results also shown for all lung cancer, squamous cell carcinoma and for adenocarcinoma. For ever/current smoking, the RR for large cell carcinoma (5.33, 4.02-7.07, n = 29) is quite similar to that for all lung cancer (5.48, 5.07-5.93, n = 342), while the RR for small cell carcinoma (11.14, 8.59-14.46, n = 61) is markedly higher, and similar to that for squamous cell carcinoma (11.62, 9.80-13.78, n = 82). This pattern is also true for current smoking, where RR estimates are higher than for ever/current smoking, and for ever smoking. Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables gives results by level of the various characteristics studied. As for all lung cancer, squamous and adeno, RRs for small cell and large cell carcinoma varied substantially by location, with RRs much higher in North America than in China, and no clear pattern for the other regions, some of which have sparse data. There was also a tendency for RRs to be higher where there was 100% histological confirmation. For ever/current smoking RRs and for small cell carcinoma, the RRs were 9.84 (7.19-13.45, n = 42) without such confirmation, and 14.62 (9.38-22.80, n = 19) with it (p < 0.01). For large cell carcinoma, the corresponding RRs were 3.90 (2.90-5.24, n = 19) without confirmation and 8.28 (5.89-11.65, n = 10) with it (p < 0.01). There was also some evidence for small cell carcinoma only that RRs were higher from more recent studies.

O. Further analyses based on independent pairs of relative risks

101Some studies provide independent RRs for males and females for the same definition of outcome and exposure. Random-effects meta-analysis of the male/female sex ratio confirms the impression already gained from the analyses shown in earlier Tables that RRs tend to be somewhat higher for males, although estimates are heterogeneous. For ever/current smoking, the sex ratio is 1.38 (1.23-1.54) for all lung cancer, based on 93 ratios, 64 higher in males; 1.31 (0.91-1.90) for squamous, based on 30 ratios, 18 higher in males, and 1.43 (1.14-1.78) for adeno, based on 33 ratios, 27 higher in males.

102As sex differences may reflect greater cigarette consumption in males, meta-analysis estimates of the sex ratio for ever/current smokers and for all lung cancer were also calculated within levels of amount smoked (as defined in section G). The sex ratio is 1.33 (1.05-1.68) for smokers of about 5 cigs/day, based on 46 ratios, 26 higher in males, 1.59 (1.25-2.01) for smokers of about 20 cigs/day, based on 25 ratios, 20 higher in males, and 1.21 (0.99-1.49) for smokers of about 45 cigs/day, based on 26 ratios, 17 higher in males.

103A number of studies provide RR estimates for ever/current smoking separately by age, and random-effects meta-analysis were conducted, based on the ratio of the estimate for the oldest age group for which data were available compared to that for the youngest. Despite only 22 of the 45 (48.9%) of the ratios showing a greater risk in the oldest age group, the meta-analysis showed a significantly higher risk in the oldest age group (ratio 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.25), the seven ratios with most weight all being greater than 1.0.

104There were also eight studies, all conducted in the US, which provide comparable sex-specific results for ever/current smoking separately for white people and black people (or non-white people). Random-effects meta-analyses of the white/black race ratio showed no difference between the races (1.05, 0.90-1.23, n = 14).

P. Further analyses based on non-independent pairs of relative risks

105Some studies also provide separate non-independent least-adjusted and most-adjusted RRs for the same definition of exposure. There is little evidence that adjustment reduces the RR for ever/current smoking. Using the same preferences as in Table 11, the most-adjusted estimate is lower than the least-adjusted estimate for 57 of the 126 (45.2%) pairs for all lung cancer, for 14 of the 36 (38.9%) pairs for squamous, and for 21 of the 41 (51.2%) pairs for adeno. In no case do the percentages differ from 50% (at p < 0.05), and in each case the random-effects meta-analysis estimate based on the most-adjusted pair members is similar to the corresponding estimate based on the least-adjusted pair members (data not shown).

106RRs for a dose-related index of smoking may be adjusted for other such indices. For all lung cancer, and for four dose-related indices of smoking, pairs of otherwise similar highest vs lowest RRs were identified in which one of the pair was adjusted for the most available other aspects of smoking, and the other had no such adjustment. Both were also chosen as adjusted for the most possible other variables (although those other variables may differ between the pair). There was a clear tendency for the additional adjustment for other aspects of smoking, typically including amount smoked, to produce lower RR estimates. This was true for 18/22 (81.8%, p < 0.01) of the pairs of estimates for age of starting to smoke, 12/15 (80.0%, p < 0.05) of the pairs for duration of smoking, all 17 (100%, p < 0.001) of those for years quit, and 5/7 (71.4%, NS) of those for tar level.

107Based on results for ever/current smoking and for all lung cancer, RRs for mixed smokers were compared with those for smokers of cigarettes only. For 22 of the 34 (64.7%) pairs, the RR was lower for mixed smokers, but this tendency was not significant (p = 0.12). RRs for mixed smokers were also compared with those for smokers of pipes/cigars only. Here 23 of the 24 (95.8%, p < 0.001) pairs showed a lower risk in the smokers of pipes/cigars only.

Q. Publication bias

108Some results of Egger’s test for publication bias are presented in Tables 5, 8 and 12, with further results given in Additional file 5: Detailed Analysis Tables, but have not previously been referred to in the text. For ever smoking there is evidence of publication bias for all lung cancer (p < 0.001) and adeno (p < 0.01), but not for squamous (p ≥ 0.1). For current smoking, some evidence of publication bias is seen for all lung cancer (p < 0.05), but not for squamous or adeno (p ≥ 0.1). For ex smoking, there is again evidence of bias for all lung cancer and for adeno (p < 0.001) but not for squamous. Figure 24 (all lung cancer), Figure 25 (squamous) and Figure 26 (adeno) show funnel plots for ever smoking. Where asymmetry is seen, this in the direction of there being more higher-weight RRs above the mean. This is consistent with the evidence in Table 5 of higher RRs for larger studies. Inspection of a funnel plot for ex-smoking for all lung cancer (data not shown) also showed the high weight RRs tended to be above the mean.

Evidence of a relationship

109The meta-analyses carried out demonstrate a clear relationship of smoking to overall lung cancer risk. This is evident for ever, current and ex smoking, for pipes and cigars, and for all types of cigarette studied. The increased risk in smokers is evident in both sexes, in younger and older subjects, in all continents studied and in prospective and case–control studies. That this relationship is causal is supported by the evidence of a dose–response, risk increasing with increasing amount smoked, duration of smoking, tar level and fraction smoked, and with earlier age of starting to smoke, and decreasing with duration of quitting. It is also supported by the similarity of results based on most-adjusted and least-adjusted RRs (though adjustment for amount smoked reduces the association with other dose–response indices of smoking). The association is clearly evident with each of the major histological types of lung cancer studied, being stronger for squamous and small cell carcinoma, intermediate for large cell carcinoma, and weakest for adenocarcinoma. Exceptionally, no relationship is seen between adenocarcinoma and pipe or cigar smoking.

Heterogeneity

110The studies are remarkably consistent in reporting an increased risk in ever smokers. Only two of the 328 all lung cancer RRs, none of the 102 squamous RRs, and nine of the 107 adeno RRs considered in Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 are less than 1.0. However, studies also vary markedly in the magnitude of the estimated RR, as illustrated by the high values of H seen in the meta-analysis of the major smoking indices, which often exceed 5 and sometimes exceed 20. (H values of 5, 10 and 20 are the same as I2 values of 80%, 90% and 95%). This heterogeneity is perhaps unsurprising given the many sources of variation involved, including sex, location, timing, study design and populations, definition of outcome and type of product smoked, and extent of confounder adjustment.

111Using univariable and multivariable (meta-regression) methods, we investigated variation in risk by a number of characteristics of the study and the RR for the outcomes all lung cancer, squamous and adeno. While our “fixed” multivariable models involving six characteristics (sex, location, start year of study, study type, number of cases and number of adjustment factors) explained a substantial proportion of the variation (e.g. reducing H from 22.84 to 4.72 for all lung cancer for ever smoking), there was always substantial residual heterogeneity (with H varying from 2.43 to 4.72 in the six analyses in Tables 7 and 10). Of the six characteristics studied, location was generally the most important characteristic, with RR estimates for ever and for current smoking and for all three outcomes always highest in North America, and lowest in China, and (with the exception of ever smoking for squamous) lower in the rest of Asia than in Europe, with no consistent differences seen between results for the United Kingdom, Scandinavia and the rest of Europe. Another consistently seen relationship was the tendency for RRs to vary by start year of study, with higher RRs seen in more recent studies. Three other tendencies were generally seen, though the level of significance varied according to the analysis. One was the tendency for RRs to vary by number of cases, with the lowest estimates always seen for the smaller studies, (involving 100 to 249 cases), another was the tendency for RRs to be higher in prospective studies than in case–control studies, and the third was the tendency for RRs to be somewhat higher in males than females. The final characteristic included in the fixed model, number of adjustment factors, showed no clear relationship with the RR, with significance either not present or weak (0.01 < p < 0.05), and the direction of effect inconsistent.

112We also tested for the effect of a number of other characteristics on the estimated RR. A number of relationships were seen in the univariable models that were significant. However, these mainly became non-significant in the multivariable models, presumably due to correlations between the characteristics. Where a characteristic was significant, this tended to be only in one of the six analyses, so not providing convincing evidence of a true effect. It would have been possible, for each of the six combinations of smoking status and outcome we considered, to present analyses of “best” models, based on forward stepwise regression, that each included a different set of predictive characteristics. However we felt that the regressions we presented based on a fixed model were more useful. Sources of variation are discussed further in the following paragraphs.

Sex

113If possible, sex-specific results are included in the meta-analyses, with combined sex results included only if not. Though variation by sex was not significant in all the main analyses, risk estimates generally tended to be higher for males than females. This is supported by additional analyses comparing RRs within study for the same outcome and exposure definition. Somewhat higher RRs were found in males even in analyses where comparisons were made within the same levels of daily cigarette consumption (about 5, 20 or 45 cigs/day). Even so, the existence of somewhat higher RRs for males does not necessarily indicate any greater susceptibility, as it may reflect their increased exposure to occupational carcinogens, or other differences in smoking history such as greater duration of smoking or increased use of plain and higher tar cigarettes. It should be noted however that in prospective studies where smoking habits were determined at baseline, the greater tendency of males to quit during follow-up may cause bias in the reverse direction. It should also be noted that comparison of smoker/never smoker RRs for men and women does not take account of possible differences in risk between male and female never smokers, the base groups for these comparisons. A detailed overall assessment of this aspect is beyond the scope of this paper, and ideally would involve direct comparison of risk in male and female smokers, with detailed adjustment for age, smoking characteristics and major potential confounding variables. We note that Bain et al. concluded, based on analysis of two large prospective studies and review of results from six other such studies, that “women do not appear to have a greater susceptibility to lung cancer than men, given equal smoking exposure”.

Age

114While it is clear that absolute risk of lung cancer rises markedly with age, both in smokers and never smokers, it is far less clear whether the smoker/never smoker RR also does. Predictions based on the multistage model suggest that there should be a modest rise, but there is difficulty in establishing this, especially when the great majority of the studies do not give results by age. Possible effects of age were investigated in two ways. The first method (see Tables 6 and 9) was to compare RRs which were specific to subjects in specific age groups. Data here were limited for squamous and adeno, and for all lung cancer suggested a possible increase in RR with age for current smoking, but not for ever smoking. More reliable are the comparisons (described in results section O), of RRs for the highest and lowest age groups within study for ever/current smoking; between-study differences are automatically controlled for under this approach. These showed a 17% greater risk for the highest age group (95% CI 10% to 25%). Whether or not a RR was adjusted for age was considered as a characteristic in the meta-regression analyses, but it never added significantly to the fixed model for either ever or current smoking for any of the three outcomes.

Race

115Although RRs were entered onto the database, if available, there were few studies that provided such data. For eight studies which provided pairs of comparable RRs for ever/current smoking, there was no indication that RRs for white people differed systematically from those for black people (or non-white people). This, of course, does not rule out the possibility that absolute risks for white people and black people with similar smoking habits may differ. As our concern was only with RRs for smoking, and whether these vary by other characteristics, we have not attempted to collect data comparing absolute risk according to these characteristics, such as white/black RRs within never smokers, or within smokers. Detailed analysis and discussion of racial differences in lung cancer risk between black people and white people is therefore beyond the scope of this paper. Elsewhere Lee points out that in the USA black men have a higher risk of lung cancer than do white men. However, interpretation of this difference in terms of effects of smoking is not straightforward for various reasons. Thus Lee notes that though black people are more often current smokers, are less likely to quit smoking, smoke cigarettes with a higher tar level, and have higher cotinine levels, all characteristics predictive of a higher risk of lung cancer, they are also less likely to have ever smoked, smoke fewer cigarettes a day and start to smoke later, all characteristics predictive of a lower risk. Also little or no difference in lung cancer rate is seen between black and white women. Black people are much more likely than white people to use mentholated cigarettes, but no evidence of a difference in lung cancer risk associated with mentholation was found, either in the present analysis or in other reviews.

Location and national cigarette tobacco type

116A consistent tendency in our meta-analyses was for RRs to be highest in studies in North America, intermediate in Europe and lowest in Asia, particularly in China. There was no very clear evidence of a difference between European countries, or between other countries in Asia, though some of the analyses suggested relatively lower RRs in Greece and Turkey than in the rest of Europe, and higher RRs in India than in the rest of Asia. In an attempt to study a possible explanation for this difference we divided countries into three groups by national cigarette tobacco type. One was the countries (Australia, Canada, India, South Africa, UK and Zimbabwe) which typically use flue-cured Virginia tobacco, another was the countries (all except those in the other two groups) which typically use blended tobacco, and the third included Taiwan and China (countries which used both types quite commonly or where we lacked confirmed information). Including this variable into the meta-analyses did not consistently improve the prediction of our model, a finding which is consistent with the conclusions of other analyses we have conducted based on national data on lung cancer rates and smoking frequency. There are, of course other possible explanations of the clear differences in lung cancer RRs between continents, including genetic differences, and differences in baseline rates of the disease.

Study timing

117Our meta-regressions generally showed a tendency for RRs to be lower in studies which started earlier. There may be a number of reasons for this, such as changes in the relative use of cigarettes and pipes or cigars, and improvement of study quality, with better standardization of questionnaires and definition of products smoked. However we consider the most plausible reason to be changes in patterns of uptake of smoking, with smokers in earlier born cohorts being less likely to have a lengthy smoking career than smokers in later born cohorts.

Study type

118Though this was only clearly significant in the analyses of ever smoking for all lung cancer, there was a consistent tendency for RRs to be somewhat higher from prospective studies than from case–control studies. If this is a true effect, the explanation for it is unclear.

Number of cases

119In order to limit the considerable amount of work needed, we limited attention to studies involving at least 100 lung cancer cases. Given that smaller studies would have contributed much less weight to the meta-analyses than would the studies that were included, we consider that this restriction unlikely to have any material effect on our conclusions. The meta-regression analyses did show a consistent tendency for RRs to be higher in larger studies, though this was only significant for ever smoking (all lung cancer p < 0.001), squamous and adeno p < 0.05). This tendency is in the opposite direction to that predicted from publication bias. The explanation is unclear.

Adjustment for other factors

120Generally our analyses showed that adjustment for age and other factors had very little effect on the meta-analysis estimates of smoking-related RR, whether one considered the total number of adjustment factors, or the effect of specific factors. This conclusion of a minimal effect of confounding is consistent with that of a detailed analysis of data from the huge CPSII prospective study, and means that though the main results we report are based on most-adjusted estimates, this decision had little or no effect on our conclusions or on the magnitude of our estimates.

121Adjustment for other aspects of smoking is, however, important when considering the dose-related variables. Though studies rarely, if ever, present results to allow detailed analysis of the effect of adjustment for one specific aspect of smoking on RRs for another aspect, we have shown that adjustment for other aspects of smoking (which typically includes amount smoked) consistently tends to reduce associations with age of starting to smoke, duration of smoking, years quit and tar level. This is presumably due to the tendency for earlier starters and high tar smokers to smoke more heavily than do later starters and low tar smokers, and for lighter smokers to be more ready to quit smoking. Below, we further discuss the effect of adjustment on results for type of cigarette.

Product smoked

122There was consistent evidence that risk of lung cancer was higher for cigarette only smokers than for smokers of any product, and substantially higher than for smokers of pipes only, cigars only or pipes/cigars only. For current smokers, for example, RRs were 9.57 (7.90-11.59) for cigarettes only, as compared to 4.76 (3.44-6.59) for pipes/cigars only. Mixed smokers tended to have similar risks to cigarette only smokers. Interpretation of this finding is difficult as mixed smokers and cigarette only smokers may have a different total exposure to tobacco, as well as a different cigarette consumption. Data on the types of cigars or pipes smoked have not been recorded on the database, but the increased risk is evident in each continent. The results for pipes and cigars mainly apply to males and to RRs for all lung cancer. Though there are only limited results by histological type, it is interesting that there is no indication of an increased risk of adenocarcinoma for pipe and cigar smokers.

Type of cigarette smoked

123The conclusions drawn from the results in Table 14 are consistent with those drawn by one of us in a review of the relationship between lung cancer and type of cigarette conducted in 2001. This is unsurprising, because the data sets considered are very similar. The conclusions are also very similar to those of a review by Kabat carried out in 2003.

124Comparisons between filter and plain smoking are made more difficult by the variety of ways in which different reports present their results, but based on the index most closely equivalent to only filter vs. only plain, the present report shows a reduction in risk that is significant for all lung cancer (0.69, 95% CI 0.61-0.78) and for squamous (0.52, 0.40-0.68), though not for adeno (0.84, 0.66-1.08). Significant reductions in risk for all lung cancer and squamous, but not for adeno were also evident for the alternative comparisons ever filter vs. only plain, and only filter vs. ever plain. Our analyses were based on most-adjusted RR estimates, with many of the estimates adjusted for other aspects of smoking, such as number of cigarettes smoked. In 2001, a National Cancer Institute monograph claimed that apparent benefits of filter vs. plain and of low tar vs. high tar cigarettes may be illusory if RRs are adjusted for daily consumption, as switching to cigarettes with a lower machine-smoked delivery of tar and nicotine leads to “compensation” for the reduced nicotine intake by increasing numbers of cigarettes smoked. Lee and Sanders investigated this claim in detail by comparing RRs for all lung cancer adjusted and unadjusted specifically for daily cigarette consumption, and concluded that “whether or not relative risk estimates are adjusted for cigarette consumption is not crucial to the conclusion of a clear advantage to filter cigarettes and tar reduction”. This analysis is more precise than that used in this report, but its conclusions are similar, as we also found adjustment not to affect our overall conclusion that filter vs. plain cigarette smoking was associated with a lower risk of all lung cancer and of squamous. It should be noted that although no significant reduction in risk for filter cigarette smoking was seen for adeno, there was also no evidence of an increase. This would seem to argue against the claim often made that the observed rise over time in the incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma seen in many countries is due to changes in cigarette design increasing the risk of smoking-related adenocarcinoma. In this context, it should be noted that though our database contains evidence by histological type for filter vs. plain cigarette smoking, no such data were found relating to tar level.

125Our conclusions of a higher RR in handrolled vs. manufactured cigarette smokers is consistent with that of the 2001 review, with the increased risk evident, despite the limited amount of data, for squamous and adeno as well as for all lung cancer.

126Our review also found no difference in risk between smokers of mentholated and non mentholated cigarette smokers, though based on data from only three studies, only one of which provided results by histological type. Though no more recent studies have reported results by histological type, five further studies have reported results for all lung cancer, and a recently published systematic review confirms the lack of apparent effect of cigarette mentholation on the lung carcinogenicity of cigarettes.

Dose–response relationships

127We have investigated the relationship of lung cancer risk to various indices of the dose–response relationship. We did not record data on our database for pack-years, as we wished to investigate the separate roles of daily amount smoked and duration of smoking. Indeed, previous work (e.g.) has in fact suggested that pack-years is not a valid measure, as for example, smokers of 20 cigs/day for 40 years and smokers of 40 cigs/day for 20 years have very different smoking RRs despite their identical pack-years. For those indices that we did consider where there were substantial amounts of data – daily amount smoked, duration, age of starting to smoke, and time of quit (relative both to current smoking and to never smoking) – there was very clear evidence that greater exposure leads to greater risk, not only for all lung cancer, but also for squamous and adeno. The results by time of quit extend the observation that RRs in ex smokers are intermediate between those of never smokers and current smokers. Because dose–response results are expressed in categories of exposure which vary from study to study, there are difficulties in combining the evidence over studies. We have used two approaches. One is to consider the RR for the highest vs. lowest level of exposure (where highest and lowest refer to expected risk, so that early ages of starting, for example, are considered highest). The other is the key value approach where we consider categories including a specified level of exposure and not including another specified level. Both approaches have limitations. The highest vs. lowest approach will vary between study in the ratio of exposures considered, while the key value approach, although combining results relating to different exposures in different studies to a lesser extent, necessarily omits results from studies with broader categories while somewhat arbitrarily selecting or discarding RRs from studies with narrow categories. Work is ongoing on a third approach to fit a dose–response curve to the RRs and estimated dose mid-points of the categories for each study. This approach is complex, and was considered outside the scope of the current paper, which was more intended to summarize major features of the data. However, a future paper is planned which will describe the shape of these dose–response relationships including characteristics of the curves, such as the estimated time after quitting by which half the excess risk associated with continued smoking has disappeared. We note that, when considering RR for time of quitting, the problem of “reverse causation” needs to be taken into account, as evidenced by the data in Table 19 showing no decrease in risk compared to current smokers for quitters of about 3 years. Our analyses also showed that for all lung cancer, risk increased with increasing tar level and with increasing fraction smoked (or equivalently short butt length), data here being more limited and non existent by histological type. As noted earlier, when discussing cigarette type, the relationship with tar level is not an artefact of inappropriate adjustment for amount smoked, as has been claimed.

Derivation of RRs

128Almost a third of RRs used in meta-analyses were not directly available from the source or calculated directly from cross-tables of exposure by outcome, and required more complex methods to derive the required RR. It was reassuring that whether or not the RR was derived did not (with one minor exception) add predictive power to the main meta-regression models, suggesting that our extensive use of derived RRs caused no material bias.

Effect of studies with high RRs or large weight

129The statistical analyses investigated the role of various characteristics on the estimated risk of all lung cancer, squamous and adeno in relation to ever and current smoking, but generally did not formally test the effect of exclusion of specific studies with extreme RRs or large weights. An exception was the case of study LIU4 for ever smoking and all lung cancer, this study not giving data for current smoking or by histological type. The two sex-specific RRs for this study together contributed 50.9% of the weight for the 328 available RRs from all the studies, and its exclusion increased the overall fixed-effect RR from 4.22 (95% CI 4.16-4.28) to 6.47 (95% 6.34-6.60). However there was little difference in the random-effects estimates, and in the meta-regression analysis the two LIU4 RRs did not produce unusual standardized residuals, suggesting that the relatively low RRs from this study (2.76, 2.69-2.83 for males, and 2.86, 2.77-2.95 for females), were due to the characteristics of the study included in the model (in particular that it was conducted in China) and not due to its unusual results. While there are other large studies, none involved nearly as many lung cancer cases as LIU4, and we feel it unlikely that excluding other specific studies would have had a major effect on our meta-analysis estimates or on our conclusions as to how RRs varied by exposure, outcome and study and RR characteristics.

Representativeness

130We did not exclude studies on the basis of the population studied. However, most studies include subjects broadly representative of the general population. A small number of studies were conducted in miners or in other occupations with a known or suspected lung cancer risk, such as welding or foundry working. Risky occupation was considered as a characteristic in the meta-regression models but was never found to be an independent predictor of RRs associated with ever or current smoking.

Publication bias

131It is well known that researchers are more likely to wish to publish, and editors more likely to accept for publication, studies finding a statistically significant association between exposure and disease. The published literature may therefore overstate any true association or produce a false-positive relationship. As part of each meta-analysis we have carried out Egger’s test of publication bias, though results are generally shown only in the detailed tables. While evidence for such bias generally is mixed, the results for all lung cancer suggest that, where significant bias is seen, it is not in the direction of smaller studies with lower-weight RRs producing higher RRs. Rather it is, as noted above, the larger studies that tend to produce higher RRs. The reason for this finding is unclear. It should also be noted that our analyses are based only on those studies satisfying the inclusion criteria, and that one of these criteria restricted attention to studies with at least 100 lung cancer cases.

132We have not attempted to try to correct for publication bias for four reasons. Firstly, we feel that evidence for its existence is not strong. Second, any adjustment for it seems unlikely to affect our main conclusions. Third, any adjustment for it would be complicated by the restriction on study size. Finally, any correction for publication bias would be open to question, as it inevitably involves assumptions that are impossible to verify.

Bias due to misclassification of smoking status

133Another source of bias is misclassification of smoking status. Random misclassification would dilute the association, as would any tendency for cases to deny or understate their smoking more than for the general population. Any tendency for current smokers to claim to be ex-smokers, as might happen in a study conducted in a clinical setting or where patients have been advised to stop smoking, would tend to inflate the risk for ex smoking. Adjustment for misclassification would be difficult, as denial rates are likely to vary by aspects of the study design, the way questions are asked, and also by sex, age, location and other demographic variables.

Limitations

134This review has various limitations, many unavoidable. Lack of access to individual subject data limits the ability to carry out meta-analyses using similar exposure indices and confounder adjustment throughout, but obtaining such data was not feasible given many studies were conducted years ago. Obtaining a reliable definition of outcome and exposure is often hindered by incomplete information in the source papers. We do not consider that limiting attention to studies of 100 cases or more is of particular importance as results from smaller studies would contribute little weight to the overall meta-analyses. Limiting attention to studies conducted up to 1999 may be more relevant for some exposures and issues (particularly the trend in RR over time), though we feel that our consideration of data from 287 published studies should give a very reliable overall picture. The problem is that the procedures conducted for this review were extremely time-consuming and it would take some years to update the database and include smaller and more recent studies.

135It may also be argued that the analyses presented here do not make full use of all the data collected. This is inevitable, given the extensive amount of information collected and the need to present the findings in a paper of reasonable length. As noted, when discussing dose–response, we do plan further analyses. We would also be willing to make the database available to bona fide researchers for further analysis.

Conclusions

136After excluding studies involving less than 100 lung cancer cases, we identified 287 epidemiological studies of lung cancer which provided information on risk in relation to one or more of a defined list of smoking indices. Of the 267 independent principal studies, 262 provided RRs relating to all lung cancer, 84 provided RRs relating to squamous cell carcinoma, and 86 provided RRs relating to adenocarcinoma (or to outcomes that are closely equivalent). One major conclusion is that for each outcome the RRs for all major smoking indices were markedly heterogeneous.

137Another conclusion is that RR estimates for ever, current or ex smoking of any product (or cigarettes if not available) are clearly elevated for all three outcomes. Individual study RRs virtually all exceed 1.0, and based on random-effects meta-analyses of most-adjusted RRs, increases were seen for ever smoking (all lung cancer 5.50, CI 5.07-5.96, n = 328 RRs; squamous, 10.47, 8.88-12.33, n = 102; adeno 2.84, 2.41-3.35, n = 107), current smoking (all lung cancer 8.43, 7.63-9.31; squamous 16.91, 13.14-21.76; adeno 4.21, 3.32-5.34) and ex smoking (all lung cancer 4.30, 3.93-4.71; squamous 8.74, 6.94-11.01; adeno 2.85, 2.20-3.70). For all lung cancer, RRs were also elevated for cigarettes only smokers (ever smoking 6.36, 5.33-7.59) and mixed smokers of cigarettes and pipes/cigars (7.37, 5.97-9.11), though lower for smokers of pipes/cigars only (2.92, 2.38-3.57), pipes only (3.31, 2.51-4.35) and cigars only (2.95, 1.91-4.56). While pipe and cigar smoking is associated with an increased risk for squamous, there is no increase for adeno. The consistency and strength of the relationships are consistent with a causal relationship (except for pipe and cigar smoking and adenocarcinoma). A causal relationship is also supported by the fact that estimates are generally not materially affected by adjustment for confounding variables, and by the strong evidence of a dose–response relationship, with RRs for all outcomes clearly increasing with amount smoked, duration and earlier starting age, and decreasing with time quit, and for all lung cancer increasing with tar level and fraction smoked. Relationships were also clearly seen between smoking and RRs for the other major histological types, small cell carcinoma and large cell carcinoma.

138Our review also provides evidence that risk varied by type of cigarette smoked, with filter cigarette smokers having lower risks than plain cigarette smokers (a conclusion not explained by “over-adjustment” for amount smoked), and that handrolled cigarette smokers have higher risks than manufactured cigarette smokers, though mentholation of cigarettes seems unrelated to risk. It also shows that various characteristics of the study and of the RR affect risk estimates. Thus RRs were generally highest for studies in North America and lowest for Asia, particularly in China, and higher in later starting, larger and prospective studies. RRs were also somewhat higher in males than in females, though this may be related to differences in their detailed smoking habits. There is no clear tendency for the smoking/lung cancer relationship to vary with age.

139This comprehensive review provides further insight into the relationship of smoking to lung cancer and its major histological types.

Abbreviations

140CI: Confidence Interval; d.f: Degrees of Freedom; H: Heterogeneity Statistic (Ratio of deviance to degrees of freedom); LCL: Lower Confidence Limit; n: number of estimates included in meta-analysis; OR: Odds Ratio; REF: 6 character Reference code used to identify a study; RR: Relative Risk (used also to indicate any effect estimate including Odds Ratio and Hazard Ratio); UCL: Upper Confidence Limit.

Competing interests

141PNL, founder of P.N.Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd., is an independent consultant in statistics and an advisor in the fields of epidemiology and toxicology to a number of tobacco, pharmaceutical and chemical companies. This includes Philip Morris Products S.A., the sponsor of this study. BAF and KJC are employees of P.N.Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd.

Authors’ contributions

142BAF and PNL were responsible for planning the study. Literature searches were carried out by KJC with the assistance of PNL and BAF. Data entry was either carried out by KJC and checked by BAF, or carried out by BAF and checked by PNL. Where appropriate, difficulties in interpreting published data or in the appropriate methods for derivation of RRs were discussed by BAF and PNL. The statistical analyses were conducted by BAF along lines discussed and agreed with PNL. PNL and BAF jointly drafted the paper, which was then critically reviewed by KJC. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Pre-publication history

143The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:

144http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/12/385/prepub

References 692

1.
Müller FH Tabakmißbrauch und LungencarcinomZ Krebsforsch1939 495785
Not in our library
2.
Wynder EL Graham EA Tobacco smoking as a possible etiologic factor in bronchiogenic carcinoma. A study of 684 proved casesJAMA1950 143329336
Not in our library10.1001/jama.1950.02910390001001
3.
Doll R Hill AB A study of the aetiology of carcinoma of the lungBr Med J1952 212711286
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.2.4797.1271
4.
Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service: Smoking and healthReport of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service1964 Washington DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; Public Health Service: Public Health Service Publication1103http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/index.html
Not in our library
5.
US Surgeon General: Smoking and healthA report of the Surgeon General1979 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; Public Health Service7950066http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/index.html
Not in our library
6.
US Surgeon General US Surgeon General: Reducing the health consequences of smoking. 25 years of progressReducing the health consequences of smoking1989 A report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services; Public Health Services898411http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/index.html
Not in our library
7.
Hecht SS Tobacco smoke carcinogens and lung cancerJ Natl Cancer Inst1999 9111941210
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/91.14.1194
8.
Gandini S Botteri E Iodice S Boniol M Lowenfels AB Maisonneuve P Boyle P Tobacco smoking and cancer: a meta-analysisInt J Cancer2008 122155164
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.23033
9.
Khuder SA Effect of cigarette smoking on major histological types of lung cancer: a meta-analysisLung Cancer2001 31139148
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(00)00181-1
10.
Mucha L Stephenson J Morandi N Dirani R Meta-analysis of disease risk associated with smoking, by gender and intensity of smokingGend Med2006 3279291
Not in our library10.1016/s1550-8579(06)80216-0
11.
Systematic review with meta-analysis of the epidemiological evidence relating smoking to COPD, chronic bronchitis and emphysema · 2011
No notice
12.
Gardner MJ Altman DG Statistics with confidence. Confidence intervals and statistical guidelines1989 London: British Medical Journal
Not in our library
13.
Fleiss JL Gross AJ Meta-analysis in epidemiology, with special reference to studies of the association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer: a critiqueJ Clin Epidemiol1991 44127139
Not in our library10.1016/0895-4356(91)90261-7
14.
Hamling J Lee P Weitkunat R Ambühl M Facilitating meta-analyses by deriving relative effect and precision estimates for alternative comparisons from a set of estimates presented by exposure level or disease categoryStat Med2008 27954970
Not in our library10.1002/sim.3013
15.
Lee PN Simple methods for checking for possible errors in reported odds ratios, relative risks and confidence intervalsStat Med1999 1819731981
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19990815)18:15<1973::aid-sim166>3.0.co;2-g
16.
Higgins JPT Thompson SG Deeks JJ Altman DG Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ2003 327557560
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
17.
Egger M Davey Smith G Schneider M Minder C Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical testBMJ1997 315629634
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
18.
Bain C Feskanich D Speizer FE Thun M Hertzmark E Rosner BA Colditz GA Lung cancer rates in men and women with comparable histories of smokingJ Natl Cancer Inst2004 96826834
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/djh143
19.
Lee PN Studying the relationship of smoking to lung cancer using the multistage model of carcinogenesis1995 A review. Sutton, Surrey: P N Lee Statistics and Computing Ltdwww.pnlee.co.uk/Reports.htm
Not in our library
20.
Lee PN Systematic review of the epidemiological evidence comparing lung cancer risk in smokers of mentholated and unmentholated cigarettesBMC Pulm Med2011 1118
Not in our library10.1186/1471-2466-11-18
21.
Werley MS Coggins CRE Lee PN Possible effects on smokers of cigarette mentholation: A review of the evidence relating to key research questionsRegul Toxicol Pharmacol2007 47189203
Not in our library10.1016/j.yrtph.2006.09.004
22.
Lee PN Forey BA Fry JS Hamling JS Hamling JF Sanders EB Carchman RA Does use of flue-cured rather than blended cigarettes affect international variation in mortality from lung cancer and COPD?Inhal Toxicol2009 21404430www.pnlee.co.uk/Reports.htm [Download LEE2008L]
Not in our library10.1080/08958370802317737
23.
Thun MJ Apicella LF Henley SJ Smoking vs other risk factors as the cause of smoking-attributable deaths. Confounding in the courtroomJAMA2000 284706712
Not in our library10.1001/jama.284.6.706
24.
Lee PN Lung cancer and type of cigarette smokedInhal Toxicol2001 13951976
Not in our library10.1080/089583701753210353
25.
Kabat GC Fifty years' experience of reduced-tar cigarettes: what do we know about their health effects?Inhal Toxicol2003 1510591102
Not in our library10.1080/08958370390228547
26.
National Cancer Institute: Shopland DR, Burns DM, Benowitz NLRisks associated with smoking cigarettes with low machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine2001 Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute025047http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/13/index.html
Not in our library
27.
Lee PN Sanders E Does increased cigarette consumption nullify any reduction in lung cancer risk associated with low-tar filter cigarettes?Inhal Toxicol2004 16817833
Not in our library10.1080/08958370490490185
28.
Doll R Peto R Cigarette smoking and bronchial carcinoma: dose and time relationships among regular smokers and lifelong non-smokersJ Epidemiol Community Health1978 32303313
Not in our library10.1136/jech.32.4.303
29.
Abelin T Gsell OR Relative risk of pulmonary cancer in cigar and pipe smokersCancer1967 2012881296
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(196708)20:8<1288::aid-cncr2820200812>3.0.co;2-l
30.
Gsell OR Jung C Lungenkrebs in alpinem ländlichem Gebiet ohne LuftverschmutzungDtsch Med Wochenschr1964 89909919
Not in our library10.1055/s-0028-1111237
31.
Abraham E Dinya E Es Sali A Prospektív epidemiológiai vizsgálat a tüdőrák rizikócsoportok meghatározására (1975–1994). (Prospective epidemiologic study for the determination of lung cancer risk groups (1975–1994))Orv Hetil1997 138523528
Not in our library
32.
Abraham E Karácsonyi L Dinya E Dohányzás és halálozás: longitudinális epidemiológiai vizsgálat (1975–1991). (Smoking and mortality: a longitudinal epidemiological study (1975–1991))Orv Hetil1993 13411371141
Not in our library
33.
Agudo A Barnadas A Pallares C Martinez I Fabregat X Rossello J Estape J Planas J Gonzalez CA Lung cancer and cigarette smoking in women. A case–control study in Barcelona (Spain)Int J Cancer1994 59165169
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910590204
34.
Akiba S Analysis of cancer risk related to longitudinal information on smoking habitsEnviron Health Perspect1994 81520
Not in our library10.1289/ehp.94102s815
35.
Prentice RL Yoshimoto Y Mason MW Relationship of cigarette smoking and radiation exposure to cancer mortality in Hiroshima and NagasakiJ Natl Cancer Inst1983 70611622
Not in our library
36.
Akiba S Kato H Blot WJ Passive smoking and lung cancer among Japanese womenCancer Res1986 4648044807
Not in our library
37.
Blot WJ Akiba S Kato H Prentice RL, Thompson DJIonizing radiation and lung cancer: a review including preliminary results from a case–control study among A-bomb survivorsAtomic Bomb Survivor Data: Utilization and Analysis1984 Philadelphia: SIAM235248SIAM-SIMS Conference Series 10
Not in our library
38.
Alderson MR Lee PN Wang R Risks of lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke in relation to type of cigarette smokedJ Epidemiol Community Health1985 39286293
Not in our library10.1136/jech.39.4.286
39.
Alderson MR Lee PN Wang R Risk of lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke in relation to type of cigarette smoked, passive smoking and other factors1986 www.pnlee.co.uk/Reports.htm
Not in our library10.1136/jech.39.4.286
40.
Wang R An exploration of data derived from a case–control study of cigarette type and lung cancer and other diseases Thesis1983 Institute of Cancer Research: University of London
Not in our library
41.
Amandus H Costello J Silicosis and lung cancer in U.S. metal minersArch Environ Health1991 468289
Not in our library10.1080/00039896.1991.9937433
42.
Ames RG Amandus H Attfield M Green FY Vallyathan V Does coal mine dust present a risk for lung cancer? A case–control study of U.S. coal minersArch Environ Health1983 38331333
Not in our library10.1080/00039896.1983.10545816
43.
Ames RG Does coal workers' pneumoconiosis predict to lung cancer? Some evidence from a case–control studyJournal of the Society of Occupational Medicine1983 33141144
Not in our library10.1093/occmed/33.3.141
44.
Anderson KE Woo C Olson JE Sellers TA Zheng W Kushi LH Folsom AR Association of family history of cervical, ovarian, and uterine cancer with histological categories of lung cancer: the Iowa Women's Health StudyCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1997 6401405
Not in our library
45.
Drinkard CR Sellers TA Potter JD Zheng W Bostick RM Nelson CL Folsom AR Association of body mass index and body fat distribution with risk of lung cancer in older womenAm J Epidemiol1995 142600607
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117681
46.
Sellers TA Potter JD Folsom AR Association of incident lung cancer with family history of female reproductive cancers: The Iowa women's health studyGenet Epidemiol1991 8199208
Not in our library10.1002/gepi.1370080306
47.
Steinmetz KA Potter JD Folsom AR Vegetables, fruit, and lung cancer in the Iowa Women's Health StudyCancer Res1993 53536543
Not in our library
48.
Archer VE Gillam JD Wagoner JK Respiratory disease mortality among uranium minersJournal of the New York Academy of Science1976 271280293
Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb23123.x
49.
Archer VE Wagoner JK Lundin FE Uranium mining and cigarette smoking effects on manJ Occup Med1973 15204211
Not in our library
50.
Archer VE Wagoner JK Lundin FE Lung cancer among uranium miners in the United StatesHealth Phys1973 25351371
Not in our library10.1097/00004032-197310000-00001
51.
Archer VE Gillam JD James LA Nieburgs HERadiation, smoking and height relationships to lung cancer in uranium minersProceedings of the Third International Symposium on Detection and Prevention of Cancer1979 New York: Marcel Dekker16891712
Not in our library
52.
Saccomanno G Archer VE Auerbach O Saunders RP Brennan LM Development of carcinoma of the lung as reflected in exfoliated cellsCancer1974 33256270
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(197401)33:1<256::aid-cncr2820330139>3.0.co;2-g
53.
Whittemore AS McMillan A Lung cancer mortality among U.S. uranium miners: a reappraisalJ Natl Cancer Inst1983 71489499
Not in our library
54.
Armadans-Gil L Vaqué-Rafart J Rosselló J Olona M Alsedà M Cigarette smoking and male lung cancer risk with special regard to type of tobaccoInt J Epidemiol1999 28614619
Not in our library10.1093/ije/28.4.614
55.
Austin H Delzell E Lally C Rotimi C Oestenstad K A case–control study of lung cancer at a foundry and two engine plantsAm J Ind Med1997 31414421
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199704)31:4<414::aid-ajim6>3.0.co;2-v
56.
Rotimi C Austin H Delzell E Day C Macaluso M Honda Y Retrospective follow-up study of foundry and engine plant workersAm J Ind Med1993 24485498
Not in our library10.1002/ajim.4700240412
57.
Auvinen A Mäkeläinen I Hakama M Castrén O Pukkala E Reisbacka H Rytömaa T Indoor radon exposure and risk of lung cancer: a nested-case–control study in FinlandJ Natl Cancer Inst1996 88966972Erratum appears in J Natl Cancer Inst 1998, 90:401–2
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/88.14.966
58.
Lagarde F Pershagen G Re: Indoor radon exposure and risk of lung cancer: a nested case–control study in FinlandJ Natl Cancer Inst1997 89584
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/89.8.584
59.
Auvinen A Mäkeläinen I Hakama M Castrén O Pukkala E Reisbacka H Rytömaa T Re: Indoor radon exposure and risk of lung cancer: a nested case–control study in FinlandJ Natl Cancer Inst1997 89584585
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/88.14.966
60.
Auvinen A Makelainen I Hakama M Castren O Pukkala E Reisbacka H Rytömaa T Indoor radon exposure and risk of lung cancer: a nested case–control study in Finland [Erratum letter]J Natl Cancer Inst1998 90401402
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/88.14.966
61.
Axelson O Andersson K Desai G Fagerlund I Jansson B Karlsson C Wingren G Indoor radon exposure and active and passive smoking in relation to the occurrence of lung cancerScand J Work Environ Health1988 14286292
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.1918
62.
Rylander R Axelsson G Andersson L Liljequist T Bergman B Lung cancer, smoking and diet among Swedish men. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 14Suppl 1S75S83
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90212-3
63.
Rylander R Axelsson G Andersson L Liljequist T Bergman B Lung cancer, smoking and diet among Swedish menInternational symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer. Dec 12–16 1994, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China1994 19Paper 7
Not in our library
64.
Axelsson G Liljeqvist T Andersson L Bergman B Rylander R Dietary factors and lung cancer among men in West SwedenInt J Epidemiol1996 253239
Not in our library10.1093/ije/25.1.32
65.
Modigh C Axelsson G Alavanja M Andersson L Rylander R Pet birds and risk of lung cancer in Sweden: a case–control studyBMJ1996 31312361238
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.313.7067.1236
66.
Band PR Spinelli JJ Threlfall WJ Fang R Le ND Gallagher RP Identification of occupational cancer risks in British Columbia. Part I: methodology, descriptive results, and analysis of cancer risks, by cigarette smoking categories of 15,463 incident cancer casesJ Occup Environ Med1999 41224232
Not in our library10.1097/00043764-199904000-00004
67.
Barbone F Bovenzi M Cavallieri F Stanta G Cigarette smoking and histologic type of lung cancer in menChest1997 11214741479
Not in our library10.1378/chest.112.6.1474
68.
Bovenzi M Stanta G Antiga G Peruzzo P Cavallieri F Occupational exposure and lung cancer risk in a coastal area of northeastern ItalyInt Arch Occup Environ Health1993 653541
Not in our library10.1007/bf00586056
69.
Bovenzi M Stanta G Antiga GL Peruzzo P Cavallieri F Occupazione e rischio di tumore polmonare nella provincia di Trieste: uno studio caso-controllo. (Occupation and lung cancer risk in the province of Trieste: a case–control study)Med Lav1992 83338348
Not in our library
70.
Biggeri A Barbone F Lagazio C Bovenzi M Stanta G Air pollution and lung cancer in Trieste, Italy: spatial analysis of risk as a function of distance from sourcesEnviron Health Perspect1996 104750754
Not in our library10.1289/ehp.96104750
71.
Barbone F Bovenzi M Biggeri A Lagazio C Cavallieri F Stanta G Confronto di metodi di epidemiologia analitica in uno studio caso-controllo su inquinamento atmosferico e tumore polmonare a Trieste. (Comparison of epidemiologic methods in a case–control study of lung cancer and air pollution in Trieste, Italy)Epidemiol Prev1995 19193205
Not in our library
72.
Barbone F Bovenzi M Cavallieri F Stanta G Air pollution and lung cancer in Trieste, ItalyAm J Epidemiol1995 14111611169
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117389
73.
Becher H Jockel K-H Timm J Wichmann HE Drescher K Smoking cessation and nonsmoking intervals: effect of different smoking patterns on lung cancer riskCancer Causes Control1991 2381387
Not in our library10.1007/bf00054298
74.
Jöckel K-H Ahrens W Wichmann H-E Becher H Bolm-Audorff U Jahn I Molik B Greiser E Timm J Occupational and environmental hazards associated with lung cancerInt J Epidemiol1992 21202213
Not in our library10.1093/ije/21.2.202
75.
Wichmann HE Molik B Jöckel K-H Jahn I Müller KM Ergebnisse zur histologie des bronchialkarzinoms aus einer epidemiologischen untersuchung in Nordrhein-Westfalen und Norddeutschland. (Results of the histology of bronchial carcinoma from an epidemiological study in North Rhine-Westphalia and northern Germany)Pneumologie1990 4412511258
Not in our library
76.
Benhamou S Benhamou E Tirmarche M Flamant R Lung cancer and use of cigarettes: A French case–control studyJ Natl Cancer Inst1985 7411691175
Not in our library
77.
Benhamou S Benhamou E Flamant R Lung cancer risk associated with cigar and pipe smokingInt J Cancer1986 37825829
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910370605
78.
Benhamou E Benhamou S Flamant R Lung cancer and women: results of a French case–control studyBr J Cancer1987 559195
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1987.19
79.
Benhamou E Benhamou S Auquier A Flamant R Changes in patterns of cigarette smoking and lung cancer risk: results of a case–control studyBr J Cancer1989 60601604
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1989.322
80.
Benhamou S Benhamou E Auquier A Flamant R Differential effects of tar content, type of tobacco and use of a filter on lung cancer risk in male cigarette smokersInt J Epidemiol1994 23437443
Not in our library10.1093/ije/23.3.437
81.
Benhamou S Benhamou E The effect of age at smoking initiation on lung cancer risk [Letter]Epidemiology1994 5560
Not in our library
82.
Ben-Shlomo Y Davey Smith G Shipley MJ Marmot MG What determines mortality risk in male former cigarette smokers?Am J Public Health1994 8412351242
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.84.8.1235
83.
Higenbottam T Shipley MJ Rose G Cigarettes, lung cancer, and coronary heart disease: the effects of inhalation and tar yieldJ Epidemiol Community Health1982 36113117
Not in our library10.1136/jech.36.2.113
84.
Marmot MG Shipley MJ Rose G Inequalities in death - specific explanations of a general pattern?Lancet1984 110031006
Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(84)92337-7
85.
Borland C Chamberlain A Higenbottam T Shipley M Rose G Carbon monoxide yield of cigarettes and its relation to cardiorespiratory diseaseBr Med J1983 28715831586
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.287.6405.1583
86.
Benhamou E Benhamou S Black (air-cured) and blond (flue-cured) tobacco and cancer risk VI: lung cancerEur J Cancer1993 29A17781780
Not in our library10.1016/0959-8049(93)90124-x
87.
Hole DJ Gillis CR Hawthorne VM Boyle P Statistical analysis of a case control and cohort study of cigarette smoking and lung cancer in the west of Scotland [Abstract]J Epidemiol Community Health1983 37158159
Not in our library
88.
Department of National Health and Welfare CanadaA Canadian study of smoking and health1966 Canada: Department of National Health and Welfare
Not in our library
89.
Best EWR Josie GH Walker CB A Canadian study of mortality in relation to smoking habits - a preliminary reportCan J Public Health1961 5299106
Not in our library
90.
Best EWR Walker CB A Canadian study of smoking and health, second reportCan J Public Health1964 55111
Not in our library
91.
Best EWR Walker CB Baker PM Delaquis FM McGregor JT McKenzie AC Summary of a Canadian study of smoking and healthCMAJ1967 9611041108
Not in our library
92.
Blohmke M Engelhardt B Stelzer O Investigations on the personality of patients with pulmonary carcinomas compared to a control groupBulletin of the European Institute of Ecology and Cancer1981 96775
Not in our library
93.
Blot WJ Harrington JM Toledo A Hoover R Heath CW Jr Fraumeni JF Jr Lung cancer after employment in shipyards during World War IIN Engl J Med1978 299620624
Not in our library10.1056/nejm197809212991202
94.
Blot WJ Davies JE Morris Brown L Nordwall CW Buiatti E Ng A Fraumeni JF Jr Occupation and the high risk of lung cancer in Northeast FloridaCancer1982 50364371
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19820715)50:2<364::aid-cncr2820500234>3.0.co;2-q
95.
Hayes RB Thomas T Silverman DT Vineis P Blot WJ Mason TJ Pickle LW Correa P Fontham ETH Schoenberg JB Lung cancer in motor exhaust-related occupationsAm J Ind Med1989 16685695
Not in our library10.1002/ajim.4700160608
96.
Vineis P Thomas T Hayes RB Blot WJ Mason TJ Pickle LW Correa P Fontham ETH Schoenberg J Proportion of lung cancers in males, due to occupation, in different areas of the USAInt J Cancer1988 42851856
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910420610
97.
Blot WJ Morris Brown L Pottern LM Stone BJ Fraumeni JF Jr Lung cancer among long-term steel workersAm J Epidemiol1983 117706716
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113604
98.
Boffetta P Pershagen G Jöckel K-H Forastiere F Gaborieau V Heinrich J Jahn I Kreuzer M Merletti F Nyberg F Cigar and pipe smoking and lung cancer risk: a multicenter study from EuropeJ Natl Cancer Inst1999 91697701
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/91.8.697
99.
Bouchardy C Wikman H Benhamou S Hirvonen A Dayer P Husgafvel-Pursiainen K CYP1A1 genetic polymorphisms, tobacco smoking and lung cancer risk in a French Caucasian populationBiomarkers1997 2131134
Not in our library10.1080/135475097231869
100.
Boucot KR Weiss W Seidman H Carnahan WJ Cooper DA The Philadelphia Pulmonary Neoplasm Research Project; basic risk factors of lung cancer in older menAm J Epidemiol1972 95416
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a121368
101.
Boucot KR Cooper DA Weiss W Carnahan WJ Cigarettes, cough, and cancer of the lungJAMA1966 196985990
Not in our library
102.
Boucot KR Cooper DA The clinician looks at lung cancerClin Notes Resp Dis1964 336
Not in our library
103.
Weiss W Boucot KR Seidman H Carnahan WJ Risk of lung cancer according to histologic type and cigarette dosageJAMA1972 222799801
Not in our library
104.
Breslow L Hoaglin L Rasmussen G Abrams HK Occupations and cigarette smoking as factors in lung cancerAm J Public Health1954 44171181
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.44.2.171
105.
Breslow L Industrial aspects of bronchiogenic neoplasmsDiseases of the Chest1955 28421430
Not in our library10.1378/chest.28.4.421
106.
Brett GZ Benjamin B Smoking habits of men employed in industry, and mortalityBr Med J1968 38285
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.3.5610.82
107.
Brockmöller J Kerb R Drakoulis N Nitz M Roots I Genotype and phenotype of glutathione S-transferase class μ isoenzymes μ and ψ in lung cancer patients and controlsCancer Res1993 5310041011
Not in our library
108.
Bross IDJ Gibson R Risks of lung cancer in smokers who switch to filter cigarettesAm J Public Health1968 5813961403
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.58.8.1396
109.
Bross IDJ Effect of filter cigarettes on the risk of lung cancerNCI Monogr1968 283540
Not in our library
110.
Brownson RC Reif JS Keefe TJ Ferguson SW Pritzl JA Risk factors for adenocarcinoma of the lungAm J Epidemiol1987 1252534
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114509
111.
Brownson RC Chang JC Davis JR Gender and histologic type variations in smoking-related risk of lung cancerEpidemiology1992 36164
Not in our library10.1097/00001648-199201000-00012
112.
Buell PE Dunn JE Jr Breslow L Cancer of the lung and Los-Angeles-type air pollution. Prospective studyCancer1967 2021392147
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(196712)20:12<2139::aid-cncr2820201212>3.0.co;2-8
113.
Buffler PA Pickle LW Mason TJ Contant C Mizell M, Correa PThe causes of lung cancer in TexasLung cancer: causes and prevention. Proceedings of the International Lung Cancer Update Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 3–5, 19831984 Deerfield Beach, Florida: Verlag Chemie International, Inc8399
Not in our library
114.
Shaw GL Falk RT Pickle LW Mason TJ Buffler PA Lung cancer risk associated with cancer in relativesJ Clin Epidemiol1991 44429437
Not in our library10.1016/0895-4356(91)90082-k
115.
Ives JC Environmental exposures and lung cancer risk among women in Harris County, Texas, 1977–1980 Thesis1984 Houston, Texas: University of Texas: Health Science Centre
Not in our library
116.
Ives JC Buffler PA Selwyn BJ Hardy RJ Decker M Lung cancer mortality among women employed in high-risk industries and occupations in Harris County, Texas, 1977–80Am J Epidemiol1988 1276574
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114792
117.
Potter D Pickle L Mason T Buffler P Burau K Smoking-related risk factors for lung cancer by cell type among women in Texas [Abstract]Am J Epidemiol1985 122528
Not in our library
118.
Buffler PA Contant CF Pickle LW Burau K Cooper SP Mason TJ Mountain CF, Carr DTEnvironmental associations with lung cancer in Texas coastal countiesLung cancer: current status and prospects for the future1986 Austin, Texas: University of Texas System Cancer Center2734
Not in our library
119.
Vena JE Byers TE Cookfair D Swanson M Occupation and lung cancer risk. An analysis by histologic subtypesCancer1985 56910917
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19850815)56:4<910::aid-cncr2820560436>3.0.co;2-4
120.
Byers TE Graham S Haughey BP Marshall JR Swanson MK Diet and lung cancer risk: findings from the Western New York Diet StudyAm J Epidemiol1987 125351363
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114542
121.
London SJ Daly AK Cooper J Navidi WC Carpenter CL Idle JR Polymorphism of glutathione S-transferase M1 and lung cancer risk among African-Americans and Caucasians in Los Angeles County, CaliforniaJ Natl Cancer Inst1995 8712461253
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/87.16.1246
122.
London SJ Daly AK Leathart JBS Navidi WC Carpenter CC Idle JR Genetic polymorphism of CYP2D6 and lung cancer risk in African-Americans and Caucasians in Los Angeles CountyCarcinogenesis1997 1812031214
Not in our library10.1093/carcin/18.6.1203
123.
London SJ Daly AK Cooper J Carpenter CL Navidi WC Ding L Idle JR Lung cancer risk in relation to the CYP2E1 Rsa I genetic polymorphism among African-Americans and Caucasians in Los Angeles CountyPharmacogenetics1996 6151158
Not in our library10.1097/00008571-199604000-00002
124.
London SJ Daly AK Fairbrother KS Holmes C Carpenter CL Navidi WC Idle JR Lung cancer risk in African-Americans in relation to a race-specific CYP1A1 polymorphismCancer Res1995 5560356037
Not in our library
125.
Carpenter CL Morgenstern H London SJ Alcoholic beverage consumption and lung cancer risk among residents of Los Angeles CountyJ Nutr1998 128694700
Not in our library10.1093/jn/128.4.694
126.
Carpenter CL Jarvik ME Morgenstern H McCarthy WJ London SJ Mentholated cigarette smoking and lung-cancer riskAnn Epidemiol1999 9114120
Not in our library10.1016/s1047-2797(98)00042-8
127.
Cascorbi I Brockmöller J Mrozikiewicz PM Bauer S Loddenkemper R Roots I Homozygous rapid arylamine N-acetyltransferase (NAT2) genotype as a susceptibility factor for lung cancerCancer Res1996 5639613966
Not in our library
128.
Cederlöf R Friberg L Hrubec Z Lorich U The relationship of smoking and some social covariables to mortality and cancer morbidity. A ten year follow-up in a probability sample of 55,000 Swedish subjects age 18–691975 Stockholm: Karolinska Institute, Dept of Environmental HygienePart 1 and Part 2
Not in our library
129.
Carstensen J Pershagen G Eklund G Mortality in relation to cigarette and pipe smoking: 16 years' observation of 25,000 Swedish menJ Epidemiol Community Health1987 41166172
Not in our library10.1136/jech.41.2.166
130.
Nordlund LA Carstensen JM Pershagen G Cancer incidence in female smokers: a 26-year follow-upInt J Cancer1997 73625628
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19971127)73:5<625::aid-ijc2>3.0.co;2-z
131.
Nordlund LA Carstensen JM Pershagen G Are male and female smokers at equal risk of smoking-related cancer: evidence from a Swedish prospective studyScand J Public Health1999 275662
Not in our library
132.
Chan WC Colbourne MJ Fung SC Ho HC Bronchial cancer in Hong Kong 1976–1977Br J Cancer1979 39182192
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1979.29
133.
Chang AK Barrett-Connor E Edelstein S Low plasma cholesterol predicts an increased risk of lung cancer in elderly womenPrev Med1995 24557562
Not in our library10.1006/pmed.1995.1089
134.
Chatzis C Danaka G Linos A Kales SN Christiani DC Lung cancer and occupational risk factors in GreeceJ Occup Environ Med1999 412935
Not in our library10.1097/00043764-199901000-00006
135.
Chen C-J Wu H-Y Chuang Y-C Chang A-S Luh K-T Chao H-H Chen K-Y Chen S-G Lai G-M Huang H-H Epidemiologic characteristics and multiple risk factors of lung cancer in TaiwanAnticancer Res1990 10971976
Not in our library
136.
Chen XW Cai WC A case–control study of lung cancer death cases in GuangzhouActa Academiae Medicinae Guangzhou1985 1316
Not in our library
137.
Yu S-Z Zhao N Combined analysis of case–control studies of smoking and lung cancer in China. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 14Suppl 1S161S170
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90221-4
138.
Chen BY Yang JF He XZ, He DW, Xiao HPA study of lung cancer risks in ZhengzhouHealth effects of air pollution in 26 cities1984 Beijing, People's Republic of China: Ministry of Public Health450455
Not in our library
139.
Liu Z Smoking and lung cancer in China: combined analysis of eight case–control studiesInt J Epidemiol1992 21197201
Not in our library10.1093/ije/21.2.197
140.
Chiazze L Watkins DK Fryar C A case–control study of malignant and non-malignant respiratory disease among employees of a fibreglass manufacturing facilityBr J Ind Med1992 49326331
Not in our library10.1136/oem.49.5.326
141.
Chiazze L Jr Watkins DK Fryar C Kozono J A case–control study of malignant and non-malignant respiratory disease among employees of a fiberglass manufacturing facility. II. Exposure assessmentBr J Ind Med1993 50717725
Not in our library10.1136/oem.50.8.717
142.
Choi S-Y Lee K-H Lee T-O A case–control study on risk factors in lung cancerKorean Journal of Epidemiology1989 116680
Not in our library
143.
Chow W-H Schuman LM McLaughlin JK Bjelke E Gridley G Wacholder S Co Chien HT Blot WJ A cohort study of tobacco use, diet, occupation, and lung cancer mortalityCancer Causes Control1992 3247254
Not in our library10.1007/bf00124258
144.
Chyou P-H Nomura AMY Stemmermann GN Kato I Lung cancer: a prospective study of smoking, occupation, and nutrient intakeArch Environ Health1993 486972
Not in our library10.1080/00039896.1993.9938396
145.
Chyou P-H Nomura AMY Stemmermann GN A prospective study of the attributable risk of cancer due to cigarette smokingAm J Public Health1992 823740
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.82.1.37
146.
Nomura A Stemmermann GN Chyou P-H Marcus EB Buist AS Prospective study of pulmonary function and lung cancerAm Rev Respir Dis1991 144307311
Not in our library10.1164/ajrccm/144.2.307
147.
Comstock GW Alberg AJ Huang H-Y Wu K Burke AE Hoffman SC Norkus EP Gross M Cutler RG Morris JS The risk of developing lung cancer associated with antioxidants in the blood: ascorbic acid, carotenoids, α-tocopherol, selenium, and total peroxyl radical absorbing capacityCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1997 6907916
Not in our library
148.
Cookson JB Samuels BL Gane NFC Cancer of the lung in Rhodesian blacksS Afr Med J1974 4823142318
Not in our library
149.
Correa P Pickle LW Fontham E Dalager N Lin Y Haenszel W Johnson WD Mizell M, Correa PThe causes of lung cancer in LouisianaLung Cancer Causes and Prevention1984 Verlag Chemie International Inc7382
Not in our library
150.
Pickle LW Correa P Fontham E Mizell M, Correa PRecent case–control studies of lung cancer in the United StatesLung cancer: causes and prevention. Proceedings of the International Lung Cancer Update Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 3–5, 19831984 Deerfield Beach, Florida: Verlag Chemie International, Inc101115
Not in our library
151.
Fontham ETH Pickle LW Haenszel W Correa P Lin Y Falk RT Dietary vitamins A and C and lung cancer risk in LouisianaCancer1988 6222672273
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19881115)62:10<2267::aid-cncr2820621033>3.0.co;2-e
152.
Falk RT Pickle LW Fontham ETH Greenberg SD Jacobs HL Correa P Fraumeni JF Jr Epidemiology of bronchioloalveolar carcinomaCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1992 1339344
Not in our library
153.
Burns DM Shanks TG Choi W Thun MJ Heath CW Jr Garfinkel L Shopland DR, Burns DM, Garfinkel L, Samet JMThe American Cancer Society cancer prevention study I: 12-year follow-up of 1 million men and womenChanges in cigarette-related disease risks and their implications for prevention and control1997 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute113304Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph No. 8. NIH Publication No. 97–4213. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/8/m8_3.pdf
Not in our library
154.
Shanks TG Burns D Shopland DR, Burns DM, Hoffmann D, Cummings KM, Amacher RHDisease consequences of cigar smokingCigars. Health effects and trends1998 Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute105158Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph No. 9.] NIH Pub. No. 98–4302. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/9/m9_4.PDF
Not in our library
155.
Hammond EC Garfinkel L Seidman H Lew EA "Tar" and nicotine content of cigarette smoke in relation to death ratesEnviron Res1976 12263274
Not in our library10.1016/0013-9351(76)90036-0
156.
Stellman SD Garfinkel L Lung cancer risk is proportional to cigarette tar yield: evidence from a prospective studyPrev Med1989 18518525
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(89)90010-8
157.
Hammond EC Lee HKSmoking habits and air pollution in relation to lung cancerEnvironmental factors in respiratory diseases1972 New York: Academic Press Inc177198
Not in our library
158.
Hammond EC Garfinkel L, Ochs O, Mushinski MMatched groups analysis methodSelection, follow-up and analysis in prospective studies: A workshop1985 Bethesda MD: US Department of Health and Human Services157160National Cancer Institute Monograph No 67, NIH Publication No 85–2713
Not in our library
159.
Hammond EC Haenszel WSmoking in relation to the death rates of one million men and womenEpidemiological approaches to the study of cancer and other chronic diseases1966 Bethesda, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Public Health Service National Cancer Institute127204National Cancer Institute Monograph 19
Not in our library
160.
Hammond EC Seidman H Smoking and cancer in the United StatesPrev Med1980 9169173
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(80)90071-7
161.
Hammond EC Smoking in relation to mortality and morbidity. Findings in first thirty-four months of follow-up in a prospective study started in 1959J Natl Cancer Inst1964 3211611188
Not in our library
162.
Hammond EC Evidence on the effects of giving up cigarette smokingAm J Public Health1965 55682691
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.55.5.682
163.
Hammond EC Air pollution, smoking, and healthTexas Journal of Medicine1962 58639647
Not in our library
164.
Hammond EC Prospective studies on smoking in relation to death ratesBulletin de l'Institut International de Statistique1961 115
Not in our library
165.
Hammond EC Street EC Smoking habits and disease in IllinoisIllinois Medical Journal1964 126661665
Not in our library
166.
Hammond EC Fent LS Cramer Reed D Wilson JL Smoking habits… … and health in Kansas and other Central StatesJournal of the Kansas Medical Society1964 65586590
Not in our library
167.
Hammond EC Smoking habits and health in Maryland and neighboring statesMd Med J1964 134550
Not in our library
168.
Hammond EC Halloran JJ Nicodemus EC Smoking habits and disease in PennsylvaniaPennsylvania Medical Journal1964 641923
Not in our library
169.
Hammond EC Van Griethuysen TH Dibeler JB Sneddon AM Halligan W Smoking habits and disease in New York StateN Y State J Med1965 6525572561
Not in our library
170.
Hammond EC Smoking habits and health in Indiana and neighboring statesJ Indiana State Med Assoc1965 58945950
Not in our library
171.
Hammond EC Letton AH Smoking habits and health in Georgia and other southern statesJ Med Assoc Ga1965 54278281
Not in our library
172.
Hammond EC Gerber LF Smoking habits and disease in OhioOhio State Medical Journal1965 61134137
Not in our library
173.
Hammond EC Wilson O Smoking habits and disease in MissouriMo Med1965 62109122
Not in our library
174.
Hammond EC Berglund L Kaslow R Smoking habits and diseaseMinn Med1965 484449
Not in our library
175.
Thun MJ Day-Lally CA Calle EE Flanders WD Heath CW Jr Excess mortality among cigarette smokers: changes in a 20-year intervalAm J Public Health1995 8512231230
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.85.9.1223
176.
Thun MJ Heath CW Jr Changes in mortality from smoking in two American Cancer Society prospective studies since 1959Prev Med1997 26422426
Not in our library10.1006/pmed.1997.0182
177.
Thun MJ Day-Lally C Myers DG Calle EE Flanders WD Zhu B-P Namboodiri MM Heath CW Jr Shopland DR, Burns DM, Garfinkel L, Samet JMTrends in tobacco smoking and mortality from cigarette use in cancer prevention studies I (1959 through 1965) and II (1982 through 1988)Changes in cigarette-related disease risks and their implications for prevention and control1997 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute305382[Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph No. 8.] NIH Pub. No. 97–4213. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/8/m8_4.pdf
Not in our library
178.
Thun MJ Lally CA Flannery JT Calle EE Flanders WD Heath CW Jr Cigarette smoking and changes in the histopathology of lung cancerJ Natl Cancer Inst1997 8915801586
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/89.21.1580
179.
Thun MJ Day-Lally C Myers DG Calle EE Dana F Zhu B-P Namboodiri MM Heath CW Jr Shopland DR, Burns DM, Garfinkel L, Samet JMAge and the exposure-response relationships between cigarette smoking and premature death in Cancer Prevention Study IIChanges in cigarette-related disease risks and their implications for prevention and control1997 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute383475Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph No. 8. NIH Pub. No. 97–4213. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/8/m8_5.pdf
Not in our library
180.
Jacobs EJ Shapiro JA Thun MJ Cigar smoking in men and risk of death from tobacco-related cancers [Abstract of the 32nd Annual Society for Epidemiologic Research Meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, June 10–12, 1999]Am J Epidemiol1999 149S71
Not in our library
181.
Pope CA III Thun MJ Namboodiri M Dockery DW Evans JS Speizer FE Heath CW Jr Particulate air pollution as a predictor of mortality in a prospective study of U.S. adultsAm J Respir Crit Care Med1995 151669674
Not in our library10.1164/ajrccm/151.3_pt_1.669
182.
Halpern MT Gillespie BW Warner KE Patterns of absolute risk of lung cancer mortality in former smokersJ Natl Cancer Inst1993 85457464
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/85.6.457
183.
Stellman SD Garfinkel L Proportions of cancer deaths attributable to cigarette smoking in womenWomen Health1989 151928
Not in our library10.1300/j013v15n02_03
184.
Garfinkel L Stellman SD Smoking and lung cancer in women: findings in a prospective studyCancer Res1988 4869516955
Not in our library
185.
US Surgeon GeneralThe health benefits of smoking cessation. A report of the Surgeon General1990 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and HealthDHHS Publication No. (CDC) 90–8416. http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/index.html
Not in our library
186.
Samet JM Health benefits of smoking cessationClin Chest Med1991 12669679
Not in our library
187.
Shopland DR Eyre HJ Pechacek TF Smoking-attributable cancer mortality in 1991: is lung cancer now the leading cause of death among smokers in the United States?J Natl Cancer Inst1991 8311421148
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/83.16.1142
188.
Cardenas VM Environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer mortality in the American Cancer Society's Cancer Prevention Study II Thesis1994 Atlanta, Georgia: Emory University
Not in our library10.1023/a:1018483121625
189.
Damber L Larsson L-G Smoking and lung cancer with special regard to type of smoking and type of cancer. A case–control study in northern SwedenBr J Cancer1986 53673681
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1986.111
190.
Damber L Lung cancer in males. An epidemiological study in Northern Sweden with special regard to smoking and occupation Thesis1986 Umea, Sweden: UMEA University Medical Dissertations (New Series no.167)
Not in our library
191.
Damber L Larsson L-G Occupation and male lung cancerA case–control study in northern Sweden: Unknown
Not in our library10.1136/oem.44.7.446
192.
Larsson LG Damber L Interaction between underground mining and smoking in the causation of lung cancer: a study of nonuranium miners in northern SwedenCancer Detect Prev1982 5385389
Not in our library
193.
Damber L Larsson L-G Lung cancer in males and type of dwelling. An epidemiological pilot studyActa Radiologica Oncology1987 26211215
Not in our library10.3109/02841868709091434
194.
Damber L Larsson LG Professional driving, smoking, and lung cancer: a case referent studyBr J Ind Med1985 42246252
Not in our library10.1136/oem.42.4.246
195.
Damber L Larsson L-G Combined effects of mining and smoking in the causation of lung carcinoma: a case–control study in northern SwedenActa Radiologica Oncology1982 21305313
Not in our library10.3109/02841868209134020
196.
Damber L Larsson L-G Underground mining, smoking, and lung cancer: A case–control study in the iron ore municipalities in Northern SwedenJ Natl Cancer Inst1985 7412071213
Not in our library
197.
Risk of lung cancer associated with residential radon exposure in south-west England: a case-control study · 1998
No notice
198.
Schairer E Schöniger E Lung cancer and tobacco consumptionZeitschrift für Krebsforschung1943 54261271
Not in our library
199.
Davey Smith G Ströbele S Egger M Smoking and death. Public health measures were taken more than 40 years ago [Letter]BMJ1995 310396
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.310.6976.396
200.
Proctor RN The Nazi war on tobacco: ideology, evidence and possible cancer consequencesBull Hist Med1997 71435488
Not in our library10.1353/bhm.1997.0139
201.
Schairer E Schöniger E Lung cancer and tobacco consumptionInt J Epidemiol2001 302427
Not in our library10.1093/ije/30.1.24
202.
Dean G Lung cancer among white South Africans: report on a further studyBr Med J1961 215991605
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.2.5267.1599
203.
Oettle AG Cigarette smoking as the major cause of lung cancerS Afr Med J1963 37935941
Not in our library
204.
Wicken AJ Environmental and personal factors in lung cancer and bronchitis mortality in Northern Ireland, 1960–19621966 London: Tobacco Research Council
Not in our library
205.
Dean G Lung cancer and bronchitis in Northern Ireland, 1960–2Br Med J1966 115061514
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.1.5502.1506
206.
Dean G Lee PN Todd GF Wicken AJ Report on a second retrospective mortality study in North-East England - Part I. Factors related to mortality from lung cancer, bronchitis, heart disease and stroke in Cleveland County, with particular emphasis on the relative risks associated with smoking filter and plain cigarettes1977 London: Tobacco Research CouncilResearch Paper 14
Not in our library
207.
Dean G Lee PN Todd GF Wicken AJ Report on a second retrospective mortality study in North-East England - Part II. Changes in lung cancer and bronchitis mortality and in other relevant factors occurring in areas of North-East England, 1963–721978 London: Tobacco Research Council
Not in our library
208.
de Klerk NH Musk AW Silica, compensated silicosis, and lung cancer in Western Australian goldminersOccup Environ Med1998 55243248
Not in our library10.1136/oem.55.4.243
209.
Armstrong BK McNulty JC Levitt LJ Williams KA Hobbs MST Mortality in gold and coal miners in Western Australia with special reference to lung cancerBr J Ind Med1979 36199205
Not in our library10.1136/oem.36.3.199
210.
de Klerk NH Musk AW Tetlow S Hansen J Eccles JL Preliminary study of lung cancer mortality among Western Australian gold miners exposed to silicaScand J Work Environ Health1995 21Suppl 26668
Not in our library
211.
de Stefani E Deneo-Pellegrini H Mendilaharsu M Carzoglio JC Ronco A Dietary fat and lung cancer: a case–control study in UruguayCancer Causes Control1997 8913921
Not in our library10.1023/a:1018424614723
212.
de Stefani E Deneo-Pellegrini H Mendilaharsu M Ronco A Carzoglio JC Dietary sugar and lung cancer: a case–control study in UruguayNutr Cancer1998 31132137
Not in our library10.1080/01635589809514692
213.
Deneo-Pellegrini H De Stephani E Ronco A Mendilaharsu M Carzoglio J Meat consumption and risk of lung cancer; a case–control study from UruguayLung Cancer1996 14195205
Not in our library10.1016/0169-5002(95)00546-3
214.
de Stefani E Deneo-Pellegrini H Carzoglio JC Ronco A Mendilaharsu M Dietary nitrosodimethylamine and the risk of lung cancer: a case–control study from UruguayCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1996 5679682
Not in our library
215.
de Stefani E Kogevinas M Boffetta P Ronco A Mendilaharsu M Occupation and the risk of lung cancer in UruguayScand J Work Environ Health1996 22346352
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.152
216.
de Stefani E Fontham ETH Chen V Correa P Deneo-Pellegrini H Ronco A Mendilaharsu M Fatty foods and the risk of lung cancer: a case–control study from UruguayInt J Cancer1997 71760766
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19970529)71:5<760::aid-ijc12>3.0.co;2-c
217.
Mendilaharsu M de Stefani E Deneo-Pellegrini H Carzoglio JC Ronco A Consumption of tea and coffee and the risk of lung cancer in cigarette-smoking men: a case–control study in UruguayLung Cancer1998 19101107
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(97)00075-5
218.
de Stefani E Fierro L Correa P Fontham E Ronco A Larrinaga M Balbi J Mendilaharsu M Mate drinking and risk of lung cancer in males: a case–control study from UruguayCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1996 5515519
Not in our library
219.
de Stefani E Fierro L Larrinaga MT Balbi JC Ronco A Mendilaharsu M Smoking of hand-rolled cigarettes as a risk factor for small cell lung cancer in men: a case–control study from UruguayLung Cancer1994 11191199
Not in our library10.1016/0169-5002(94)90539-8
220.
de Stefani E Correa P Fierro L Fontham ETH Chen V Zavala D The effect of alcohol on the risk of lung cancer in UruguayCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1993 22126
Not in our library
221.
de Stefani E Fierro L Correa P Carzoglio J Deneo-Pellegrini H Zavala D Fontham E Chen V Type of tobacco and risk of lung cancer: a case–control study from UruguayLung Cancer1992 82128
Not in our library
222.
Dockery DW Pope A III Xu X Spengler JD Ware JH Fay ME Ferris BG Jr Speizer FE An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. citiesN Engl J Med1993 32917531759
Not in our library10.1056/nejm199312093292401
223.
Ferris BG Jr Speizer FE Spengler JD Dockery D Bishop YMM Wolfson M Humble C Effects of sulfur oxides and respirable particles on human health: methodology and demography of populations in studyAm Rev Respir Dis1979 120767779
Not in our library10.1164/arrd.1979.120.4.767
224.
Doll R Hill AB Smoking and carcinoma of the lung. Preliminary reportBr Med J1950 2739748
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.2.4682.739
225.
Doll R Smoking and carcinoma of the lungCancer of the lung (endemiology): a symposium1954 6980
Not in our library
226.
Doll R Greenstein JP, Haddow AEtiology of lung cancerAdvances in cancer research1955 New York: Academic Press Inc[vol III.]
Not in our library
227.
Doll R Hill AB Kreyberg L The significance of cell type in relation to the aetiology of lung cancerBr J Cancer1957 114348
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1957.6
228.
Doll R Peto R Wheatley K Gray R Sutherland I Mortality in relation to smoking: 40 years' observations on male British doctorsBMJ1994 309901911
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.309.6959.901
229.
Doll R Hill AB The mortality of doctors in relation to their smoking habits. A preliminary reportBr Med J1954 114511455
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.1.4877.1451
230.
Doll R Hill AB Lung cancer and other causes of death in relation to smoking. A second report on the mortality of British doctorsBr Med J1956 210711081
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.2.5001.1071
231.
Doll R Lung cancer and cigarette smokingActa Union Internationale Contre le Cancer1959 15417423
Not in our library
232.
Doll R Smoking and lung cancer: Report to the sub-committee for the study of the risks of cancer from air pollution and the consumption of tobaccoActa Union Internationale Contre le Cancer1959 1512831295
Not in our library
233.
Doll R Hill AB Mortality in relation to smoking: ten years' observations of British doctorsBr Med J1964 113991410
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.1.5395.1399
234.
Doll R Hill AB Mortality in relation to smoking: ten years' observations of British doctorsBr Med J1964 114601467
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.1.5396.1460
235.
Doll R Peto R Mortality in relation to smoking: 20 years' observations on male British doctorsBr Med J1976 215251536Erratum appears in BMJ in BMJ 1980, 971
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.2.6051.1525
236.
Doll R Peto R Mortality among doctors in different occupationsBr Med J1977 114331436
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.1.6074.1433
237.
Doll R Atmospheric pollution and lung cancerEnviron Health Perspect1978 222331
Not in our library10.1289/ehp.782223
238.
Doll R Gray R Hafner B Peto R Mortality in relation to smoking: 22 years' observations on female British doctorsBr Med J1980 i967971
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.280.6219.967
239.
Peto R Smoking and death: the past 40 years and the next 40BMJ1994 309937939
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.309.6959.937
240.
Dorant E van den Brandt PA Goldbohm RA A prospective cohort study on allium vegetable consumption, garlic supplement use, and the risk of lung carcinoma in the NetherlandsCancer Res1994 5461486153
Not in our library
241.
van Loon AJM Goldbohm RA van den Brandt PA Lung cancer: is there an association with socioeconomic status in The Netherlands?J Epidemiol Community Health1995 496569
Not in our library10.1136/jech.49.1.65
242.
van den Brandt PA Goldbohm RA van t' Veer P Volovics A Hermus RJJ Sturmans F A large-scale prospective cohort study on diet and cancer in the NetherlandsJ Clin Epidemiol1990 43285295
Not in our library10.1016/0895-4356(90)90009-e
243.
van den Brandt PA Goldbohm RA van t' Veer P Bode P Dorant E Hermus RJJ Sturmans F A prospective cohort study on selenium status and the risk of lung cancerCancer Res1993 5348604865
Not in our library
244.
Dorgan JF Ziegler RG Schoenberg JB Hartge P McAdams MJ Falk RT Wilcox HB Shaw GL Race and sex differences in associations of vegetables, fruits, and carotenoids with lung cancer risk in New Jersey (United States)Cancer Causes Control1993 4273281
Not in our library10.1007/bf00051322
245.
Schoenberg JB Stemhagen A Mason TJ Patterson J Bill J Altman R Occupation and lung cancer risk among New Jersey white malesJ Natl Cancer Inst1987 791321
Not in our library
246.
Schoenberg JB Klotz JB Wilcox HB Nicholls GP Gil-del-Real MT Stemhagen A Mason TJ Case–control study of residential radon and lung cancer among New Jersey WomenCancer Res1990 5065206524
Not in our library
247.
Schoenberg JB Wilcox HB Mason TJ Bill J Stemhagen A Variation in smoking-related lung cancer risk among New Jersey womenAm J Epidemiol1989 130688695
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115390
248.
Ziegler RG Mason TJ Stemhagen A Hoover R Schoenberg JB Gridley G Virgo PW Fraumeni JF Jr Carotenoid intake, vegetables, and the risk of lung cancer among white men in New JerseyAm J Epidemiol1986 12310801093
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114336
249.
Wilcox HB Schoenberg JB Mason TJ Bill JS Stemhagen A Smoking and lung cancer: risk as a function of cigarette tar contentPrev Med1988 17263272
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(88)90002-3
250.
Ziegler RG Epidemiologic studies of vitamins and cancer of the lung, esophagus, and cervixAdv Exp Med Biol1986 2061126
Not in our library10.1007/978-1-4613-1835-4_3
251.
McLaughlin JK Hrubec Z Blot WJ Fraumeni JF Jr Smoking and cancer mortality among U.S. veterans: a 26-year follow-upInt J Cancer1995 60190193
Not in our library
252.
Hrubec Z McLaughlin JK Shopland DR, Burns DM, Garfinkel L, Samet JMFormer cigarette smoking and mortality among U.S. veterans: a 26-year followup, 1954 to 1980Changes in cigarette-related disease risks and their implications for prevention and control1997 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute501530[Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph No. 8.] NIH Pub. No. 97–4213. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/8/m8_7.pdf
Not in our library
253.
Rogot E Murray JL Smoking and causes of death among US Veterans: 16 years of observationPublic Health Rep1980 95213222
Not in our library
254.
Rogot E Smoking and general mortality among US veterans, 1954–19691974 Bethesda, Md: Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Not in our library
255.
Rogot E Smoking and mortality among U.S. veteransJ Chronic Dis1974 27189203
Not in our library10.1016/0021-9681(74)90045-9
256.
Dorn HF Tobacco consumption and mortality from cancer and other diseasesPublic Health Rep1959 74581593
Not in our library
257.
Dorn H Tobacco consumption and mortality from cancer and other diseasesActa Unio International Cancer1960 1616531665
Not in our library
258.
Kahn HA Haenszel WThe Dorn study of smoking and mortality among U.S. veterans: report on eight and one-half years of observationEpidemiological approaches to the study of cancer and other chronic diseases1966 Bethesda, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Public Health Service National Cancer Institute1125National Cancer Institute Monograph 19
Not in our library
259.
Herrold KM Survey of histologic types of primary lung cancer in US veteransPathol Annu1972 74579
Not in our library
260.
Enstrom JE Smoking cessation and mortality trends among two United States populationsJ Clin Epidemiol1999 52813825
Not in our library10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00040-2
261.
Dosemeci M Gokmen I Unsal M Hayes RB Blair A Tobacco, alcohol use, and risks of laryngeal and lung cancer by subsite and histologic type in TurkeyCancer Causes Control1997 8729737
Not in our library10.1023/a:1018479304728
262.
Droste JHJ Weyler JJ Van Meerbeeck JP Vermeire PA van Sprundel MP Occupational risk factors of lung cancer: a hospital based case–control studyOccup Environ Med1999 56322327
Not in our library10.1136/oem.56.5.322
263.
Du Y Cha Q Chen X Chen Y Huang L Feng Z Wu X Wu JM An epidemiological study of risk factors for lung cancer in Guangzhou, China. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 14Suppl 1S9S37
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90208-1
264.
Du Y-X Huang L Feng Z-Z Feng J-W Indoor and outdoor air pollution and lung cancerIn International Symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer December1994 12-161994114
Not in our library
265.
Dunn JE Jr Linden G Breslow L Lung cancer mortality experience of men in certain occupations in CaliforniaAm J Public Health1960 5014751487
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.50.10.1475
266.
Ebeling K Nischan P Screening for lung cancer - results from a case–control studyInt J Cancer1987 40141144
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910400202
267.
Engeland A Haldorsen T Andersen A Tretli S The impact of smoking habits on lung cancer risk: 28 years' observation of 26,000 Norwegian men and womenCancer Causes Control1996 7366376
Not in our library10.1007/bf00052943
268.
Kvåle G Bjelke E Gart JJ Dietary habits and lung cancer riskInt J Cancer1983 31397405
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910310402
269.
Kvåle G Bjelke E Heuch I Occupational exposure and lung cancer riskInt J Cancer1986 37185193
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910370204
270.
Lund E Zeiner-Henriksen T Røking som risikofaktor for ulike kreftformer blant 26000 norske menn og kvinner (Smoking as a risk factor for cancer among 26000 Norwegian males and females)Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen1981 10119371940
Not in our library
271.
Enstrom JE Heath CW Jr Smoking cessation and mortality trends among 118,000 Californians, 1960–1997Epidemiology1999 10500512
Not in our library
272.
Esaki H Chang CP Epidemiologic study on deaths from lung cancer in Omuta City of Japan. An analysis of the risk factors for lung cancer by a case–control study, especially on the aspects of air pollution, occupation and smoking habitsNippon Eiseigaku Zasshi1977 31703710
Not in our library10.1265/jjh.31.703
273.
Fan R Zheng S Wu Z Zhang R Cao L Li Y Study of the relation between smoking as a lifestyle factor and lung cancer in Beijing area of ChinaInternational symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer. Dec 12–16 1994, Guangzhou, People's Rep China1994 18Suppl 6
Not in our library
274.
Gao Y-T Blot WJ Zheng W Fraumeni JF Hsu C-W Lung cancer and smoking in ShanghaiInt J Epidemiol1988 17277280
Not in our library10.1093/ije/17.2.277
275.
Gao Y-T Blot WJ Zheng W Ershow AG Hsu CW Levin LI Zhang R Fraumeni JF Jr Lung cancer among Chinese womenInt J Cancer1987 40604609
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910400505
276.
Gao Y-T Zheng W Zhang Y Gao RN Xu CW Liao ML Yang ZP Lin ZQ Wang ZX Zhao JJ A case–control study of lung cancer among women in ShanghaiTumor1987 7194197
Not in our library
277.
Gao YT Zheng W Gao RN Jin F O'Neill IK, Chen J, Bartsch HTobacco smoking and its effect on health in ChinaRelevance to human cancer of N-Nitroso compounds, tobacco smoke and mycotoxins1991 Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer6267IARC Scientific Publication No. 105
Not in our library
278.
Gao YT Hsu CW Blot WJ Fraumeni JF Jr A case–control study of lung cancer in ShanghaiNCI Monogr1985 691113
Not in our library
279.
Zheng W A case–control study of lung cancer and pulmonary tuberculosisZhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi1988 11135138
Not in our library
280.
Zheng W Blot WJ Liao ML Wang ZX Levin LI Zhao JJ Fraumeni JF Jr Gao Y-T Lung cancer and prior tuberculosis infection in ShanghaiBr J Cancer1987 56501504
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1987.233
281.
Levin LI Gao Y-T Blot WJ Zheng W Fraumeni JF Jr Decreased risk of lung cancer in the cotton textile industry of ShanghaiCancer Res1987 4757775781
Not in our library
282.
Gao C-M Tajima K Kuroishi T Hirose K Inoue M Protective effects of raw vegetables and fruit against lung cancer among smokers and ex-smokers: a case–control study in the Tokai area of JapanJpn J Cancer Res1993 84594600
Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.1993.tb02018.x
283.
Hamajima N Hirose K Inoue M Takezaki T Kuroishi T Tajima K Case–control studies: matched controls or all available controls?J Clin Epidemiol1994 47971975
Not in our library10.1016/0895-4356(94)90111-2
284.
García-Closas M Kelsey KT Wiencke JK Xu X Wain JC Christiani DC A case–control study of cytochrome P450 1A1, glutathione S-transferase M1, cigarette smoking and lung cancer susceptibility (Massachusetts, United States)Cancer Causes Control1997 8544553Erratum appears in Cancer Causes and Control 1998, 9:126
Not in our library10.1023/a:1018481910663
285.
Xu X Kelsey KT Wiencke JK Wain JC Christiani DC Cytochrome P450 CYP1A1 MspI polymorphism and lung cancer susceptibilityCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1996 5687692
Not in our library
286.
Lee BW Wain JC Kelsey KT Wiencke JK Christiani DC Association of cigarette smoking and asbestos exposure with location and histology of lung cancerAm J Respir Crit Care Med1998 157748755
Not in our library10.1164/ajrccm.157.3.9707025
287.
García-Closas M Kelsey KT Wiencke JK Xu X Wain JC Christiani DC Erratum re 'A case–control study of cytochrome P450 1A1, glutathione S-transferase M1, cigarette smoking and lung cancer susceptibility (Massachusetts, United States)'Cancer Causes Control1998 9126
Not in our library10.1023/a:1018481910663
288.
Gardiner AJS Forey BA Lee PN Lester JN, Perry R, Reynolds GLThe relationship between avian exposure and bronchogenic carcinomaQuality of the indoor environment. Quality of the Indoor Environment, Athens, April 19921992 London: Selper Ltd691703
Not in our library
289.
Gardiner AJS Forey BA Lee PN Avian exposure and bronchogenic carcinomaBMJ1992 305989992
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.305.6860.989
290.
Garshick E Schenker MB Muñoz A Segal M Smith TJ Woskie SR Hammond SK Speizer FE A case–control study of lung cancer and diesel exhaust exposure in railroad workersAm Rev Respir Dis1987 13512421248
Not in our library10.1164/arrd.1987.135.6.1242
291.
Geng G Liang Z Xu R Liu J Shi P The relationship between smoking and lung cancer in humans1994 Guangzhou, People's Republic of China: In International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer18
Not in our library
292.
Geng G-Y Liang ZH Zhang AY Wu GL Aoki M, Hisamichi S, Tominaga SOn the relationship between cigarette smoking and female lung cancerSmoking and health 1987. Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Smoking and Health, Tokyo, 9–12 November 19871988 Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (Biomedical Division)483486International Congress Series No. 780
Not in our library
293.
Ger L-P Hsu W-L Chen K-T Chen C-J Risk factors of lung cancer by histological category in TaiwanAnticancer Res1993 1314911500
Not in our library
294.
Ger L-P Liou S-H Shen C-Y Kao S-J Chen K-T Risk factors of lung cancerJ Formos Med Assoc1992 91S222S231
Not in our library
295.
Gillis CR Hole DJ Boyle P Cigarette smoking and male lung cancer in an area of very high incidence. I. Report of a case–control study in the West of ScotlandJ Epidemiol Community Health1988 423843
Not in our library10.1136/jech.42.1.38
296.
Godley FH Cigarette smoking, social factors, and mortality: new estimates from representative national samples ThesisUniversity of Maryland1974
Not in our library
297.
US Department of Health Education and Welfare - Public Health ServiceCigarette smoking status - June 1966, August 1967, and August 1968Mon Vital Stat Rep1969 18Suppl14
Not in our library
298.
Golledge AH Wicken AJ Local variation in the incidence of lung cancer and bronchitis mortalityMedical Officer1964 112273277
Not in our library
299.
Wicken AJ Buck SF Report on a study of environmental factors associated with lung cancer and bronchitis mortality in areas of north east England1964 London: Tobacco Research Council; 1964. Research Paper 8
Not in our library
300.
Goodman MT Kolonel LN Yoshizawa CN Hankin JH The effect of dietary cholesterol and fat on the risk of lung cancer in HawaiiAm J Epidemiol1988 12812411255
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115078
301.
Goodman MT Hankin JH Wilkens LR Kolonel LN High-fat foods and the risk of lung cancerEpidemiology1992 3288299
Not in our library10.1097/00001648-199207000-00004
302.
Graham S Levin ML Smoking withdrawal in the reduction of risk of lung cancerCancer1971 27865871
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(197104)27:4<865::aid-cncr2820270416>3.0.co;2-8
303.
Gregor A Lee PN Roe FJC Wilson MJ Melton A Comparison of dietary histories in lung cancer cases and controls with special reference to vitamin ANutr Cancer1980 29397
Not in our library
304.
Gsell O Klinische Studien zur Aetiologie des Bronchialkarzinoms. (Clinical studies of the aetiology of bronchial cancer)Dtsch Med Wochenschr1956 81496501
Not in our library10.1055/s-0028-1115724
305.
Gsell OR Abelin T Cigar and pipe smoking in relation to lung cancer and excess mortalityJ Natl Cancer Inst1972 4817951803
Not in our library
306.
Guo Z A case–control study on the relationship between smoking and genetic background and lung cancerZhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi (Taipei)1992 72351353
Not in our library
307.
Haenszel W Shimkin MB Mantel N A retrospective study of lung cancer in womenJ Natl Cancer Inst1958 21825842
Not in our library
308.
Hammond EC Selikoff IJ Seidman H Asbestos exposure, cigarette smoking and death ratesAnn N Y Acad Sci1979 330473490
Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.1979.tb18749.x
309.
Hammond EC Selikoff IJ Bogovski P, Timbrell V, Gilson JC, Wagner JCRelation of cigarette smoking to risk of death of asbestos-associated disease among insulation workers in the United StatesBiological effects of asbestos. Proceedings of a working conference held at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France, 2–6 October 19721973 Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer312316IARC Scientific Publications No. 8
Not in our library
310.
Selikoff IJ Recent perspectives in occupational cancerAmbio1975 41417
Not in our library
311.
Saracci R Asbestos and lung cancer: an analysis of the epidemiological evidence on the asbestos-smoking interactionInt J Cancer1977 20323331
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910200302
312.
Nicholson WJ Cancer following occupational exposure to asbestos and vinyl chlorideCancer1977 3917921801
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(197704)39:4+<1792::aid-cncr2820390808>3.0.co;2-j
313.
Hammond EC Horn D Smoking and death rates - Report of forty-four months of follow-up of 187,783 men II. Death rates by causeJAMA1958 16612941308
Not in our library10.1001/jama.1958.02990110030007
314.
Hammond EC Horn D The relationship between human smoking habits and death rates: A follow up-study of 187,766 menJAMA1954 15513161328
Not in our library10.1001/jama.1954.03690330020006
315.
Hammond EC Horn D Smoking and death rates - report on forty-four months of follow-up of 187,783 men I. Total mortalityJAMA1958 16611591172
Not in our library10.1001/jama.1958.02990100047009
316.
Hammond EC Smoking and death rates - a riddle in cause and effectAm Sci1958 46331354
Not in our library
317.
Hammond EC Cigarette smoking and diseaseAm Biol Teach1959 21288297
Not in our library
318.
Hammond EC Farber SM, Wilson RHLSmoking in relation to lung cancer and other causes of death, Chap 22The air we breathe1961 Springfield, III: Charles C Thomas315339
Not in our library
319.
Hammond EC The effects of smokingSci Am1962 2073951
Not in our library10.1038/scientificamerican0762-39
320.
Hammond EC Inhalation of tobacco smokeConn Med1963 27473483
Not in our library
321.
Hansen KS Lauritsen JM Skytthe A Cancer incidence among mild steel and stainless steel welders and other metal workersAm J Ind Med1996 30373382
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199610)30:4<373::aid-ajim1>3.0.co;2-x
322.
Lauritsen JM Hansen KS Lung cancer mortality in stainless steel and mild steel welders: a nested case-referent studyAm J Ind Med1996 30383391
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199610)30:4<383::aid-ajim2>3.0.co;2-x
323.
Hegmann KT Fraser AM Keaney RP Moser SE Nilasena DS Sedlars M Higham-Gren L Lyon JL The effect of age at smoking initiation on lung cancer riskEpidemiology1993 4444448
Not in our library10.1097/00001648-199309000-00010
324.
Hegmann KT Fraser AM Keaney RP Moser SE Nilasena DS Sedlars M Higham-Gren L Lyon JL The effect of age at smoking initiation on lung cancer risk [Abstract]Epidemiology1993 13610141015
Not in our library10.1097/00001648-199309000-00010
325.
Hein HO Suadicani P Gyntelberg F Lung cancer risk and social class. The Copenhagen Male Study--17-year follow upDan Med Bull1992 39173176
Not in our library
326.
Hennekens CH Buring JE Manson JE Stampfer M Rosner B Cook NR Belanger C LaMotte F Gaziano JM Ridker PM Lack of effect of long-term supplementation with beta carotene on the incidence of malignant neoplasms and cardiovascular diseaseN Engl J Med1996 33411451149
Not in our library10.1056/nejm199605023341801
327.
Steering Committee of the Physicians' Health Study Research GroupPreliminary report: findings from the aspirin component of the ongoing Physicians' Health StudyN Engl J Med1988 318262264
Not in our library10.1056/nejm198801283180431
328.
Hinds MW Stemmermann GN Yang H-Y Kolonel LN Lee J Wegner E Differences in lung cancer risk from smoking among Japanese, Chinese and Hawaiian women in HawaiiInt J Cancer1981 27297302
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910270307
329.
Hirayama T Hamano Y The significance of the smoking factor in the epidemiology of the cancer of the lungJpn J Cancer Res1955 46418419
Not in our library
330.
Hirayama T A review of epidemiological studies on smoking and lung cancer in Japan1967 Tokyo: National Cancer Center Research Institute
Not in our library
331.
Hirayama T Wahrendorf T Life-style and mortality: A large scale census based cohort study in Japan. Contributions to epidemiology and biostatistics1990 Karger, Basle6
Not in our library
332.
Hirayama T Peto R, Schneiderman MProportion of cancer attributable to occupation obtained from a cencus, population-based, large cohort study in JapanQuantification of occupational cancer1981 Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory631649Banbury report 9
Not in our library
333.
Akiba S Hirayama T Cigarette smoking and cancer mortality risk in Japanese men and women - results from reanalysis of the Six-Prefecture Cohort study dataEnviron Health Perspect1990 871926
Not in our library10.1289/ehp.908719
334.
Hirayama T Nakahara W, Hirayama T, Nishioka K, Sugano HStrategy for cancer epidemiologyAnalytic and experimental epidemiology of cancer. Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium of the Princess Takamatsu cancer research fund1973 Baltimore London Tokyo: University Park Press393424
Not in our library
335.
Hirayama T Finkel AJ, Duel WCEpidemiology of lung cancer based on population studiesClinical implications of air pollution research1974 Massachusetts: Publishing Sciences Group, Inc6978
Not in our library
336.
Hirayama T Bucalossi P, Veronesi U, Cascinelli NProspective studies on cancer epidemiology based on census population in JapanCancer epidemiology, environmental factors. Volume 3. Proceedings XI International Cancer Congress Florence, 20–26 October 19941975 Amsterdam, New York: Excerpta Medica, American Elsevier Publishing Co Inc2635
Not in our library
337.
Hirayama T Steinfeld J, Griffiths W, Ball K, Taylor RMSmoking and cancer: A prospective study on cancer epidemiology based on a census population in JapanHealth consequences, education, cessation activities, and social action. Volume II. Proceedings of the Third World Conference on Smoking and Health, New York City, June 2–5, 19751977 USA: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare6572DHEW Publication No (NIH) 77–1413
Not in our library
338.
Hirayama T Nieburgs HEProspective studies on cancer epidemiology based on census population in JapanVolume 1. Third international symposium on detection and prevention of cancer1977 New York: Marcel Dekker113911481
Not in our library
339.
Hirayama T Diet and cancerNutr Cancer1979 16781
Not in our library
340.
Hirayama T Tominaga S, Aoki KSmoking and cancer in Japan. A prospective study on cancer epidemiology based on census population in Japan. Results of 13 years follow upThe UICC Smoking Control Workshop1982 University of Nagoya Press28
Not in our library
341.
Hirayama T Operational epidemiology of cancerJ Cancer Res Clin Oncol1981 991528
Not in our library10.1007/bf00412438
342.
Hirayama T Smoking in relation to death rates of 265,118 men and women in Japan1967 Tokyo: National Cancer Center Research Institute
Not in our library
343.
Hirayama T Durston B, Jamrozik KCohort studies on smoking and mortality in JapanTobacco and health 1990, the global war1990 Perth: 7th World Conference on Tobacco and Health3640
Not in our library
344.
Hirayama T Aoki M, Hisamichi S, Tominaga SHealth effects of active and passive smokingSmoking and health 1987. Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Smoking and Health, Tokyo, 9–12 November 19871988 Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (Biomedical Division)7586International Congress Series No. 780
Not in our library
345.
Hirayama T Mizell M, Correa PLung cancer in Japan: effects of nutrition and passive smokingLung cancer: causes and prevention. Proceedings of the International Lung Cancer Update Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 3–5, 19831984 Deerfield Beach, Florida: Verlag Chemie International, Inc175195
Not in our library
346.
Hitosugi M Epidemiological study of lung cancer with special reference to the effect of air pollution and smoking habitBulletin of the Institute of Public Health1968 17237256
Not in our library
347.
Gillis CR Hole DJ Hawthorne VM Cigarette smoking and male lung cancer in an area of very high incidence. II. Report of a general population cohort study in the West of ScotlandJ Epidemiol Community Health1988 424448
Not in our library10.1136/jech.42.1.44
348.
Gillis CR Hole DJ Hawthorne VM Boyle P The effect of environmental tobacco smoke in two urban communities in the west of ScotlandEur J Respir Dis1984 65Suppl 133121126
Not in our library
349.
Hawthorne VM Tuberculosis, respiratory and cardiovascular risks of dying in the Renfrew district of ScotlandA report to the trustees of the Renfrewshire Memorial to the late King Edward VII1985 1
Not in our library
350.
Hole DJ Gillis CR Chopra C Hawthorne VM Passive smoking and cardiorespiratory health in a general population in the west of ScotlandBMJ1989 299423427
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.299.6696.423
351.
Hawthorne VM Fry JS Smoking and health: the association between smoking behaviour, total mortality, and cardiorespiratory disease in west central ScotlandJ Epidemiol Community Health1978 32260266
Not in our library10.1136/jech.32.4.260
352.
Horowitz I Enterline PE Lung cancer among the JewsAm J Public Health1966 60275282
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.60.2.275
353.
Horwitz RI Smaldone LF Viscoli CM An ecogenetic hypothesis for lung cancer in womenArch Intern Med1988 14826092612
Not in our library
354.
Hu J Johnson KC Mao Y Xu T Lin Q Wang C Zhao F Wang G Chen Y Yang Y A case–control study of diet and lung cancer in northeast ChinaInt J Cancer1997 71924931
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19970611)71:6<924::aid-ijc2>3.0.co;2-#
355.
Fu HJ Gou J Research on causes of lung cancer: case–control study of 523 cases of lung cancerCan J Public Health1984 75161165
Not in our library
356.
Hu JF Guo JX Liu YY Wu YP An analysis of risk factors of lung cancer in Harbin cityZhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi1988 98891
Not in our library
357.
Huang C Zhang X Qiao Z Guan L Peng S Liu J Xie R Zheng L A case–control study of dietary factors in patients with lung cancerBiomed Environ Sci1992 5257265
Not in our library
358.
Humble CG Samet JM Pathak DR Skipper BJ Cigarette smoking and lung cancer in 'Hispanic' whites and other whites in New MexicoAm J Public Health1985 75145148
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.75.2.145
359.
Pathak DR Samet JM Humble CG Skipper BJ Determinants of lung cancer risk in cigarette smokers in New MexicoJ Natl Cancer Inst1986 76597604
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/76.4.597
360.
Samet JM Skipper BJ Humble CG Pathak DR Lung cancer risk and vitamin A consumption in New MexicoAm Rev Respir Dis1985 131198202
Not in our library10.1164/arrd.1985.131.2.198
361.
Samet JM Pathak DR Humble CG Skipper BJ Determinants of lung cancer risk in cigarette smokers [Abstract]Am Rev Respir Dis1984 129A146
Not in our library
362.
Humble CG Samet JM Pathak DR Marriage to a smoker and lung cancer riskAm J Public Health1987 77598602
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.77.5.598
363.
Ishimaru T Cihak RW Land CE Steer A Yamada A Lung cancer at autopsy in A-bomb survivors and controls, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1961–1970. II. Smoking, occupation, and A-bomb exposureCancer1975 3617231728
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(197511)36:5<1723::aid-cncr2820360527>3.0.co;2-k
364.
Cihak RW Ishimaru T Steer A Yamada A Lung cancer at autopsy in A-bomb survivors and controls, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1961–70. I. Autopsy findings and relation to radiationCancer1974 3315801588
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(197406)33:6<1580::aid-cncr2820330617>3.0.co;2-r
365.
Jöckel K-H Ahrens W Ingeborg J Pohlabeln H Bolm-Audorff U Occupational risk factors for lung cancer: a case–control study in West GermanyInternational Epidemiological Association1998 27549560
Not in our library10.1093/ije/27.4.549
366.
Pohlabeln H Jöckel K-H Müller K-M The relation between various histological types of lung cancer and the number of years since cessation of smokingLung Cancer1997 18223229
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(97)00067-6
367.
Jöckel K-H Ahrens W Bolm-Audorff U Lung cancer risk and welding - preliminary results from an ongoing case–control studyAm J Ind Med1994 25805812
Not in our library10.1002/ajim.4700250605
368.
Jahn I Becker U Jöckel K-H Pohlabeln H Occupational life course and lung cancer risk in men. Findings from a socio-epidemiological analysis of job-changing histories in a case–control studySoc Sci Med1995 40961975
Not in our library10.1016/0277-9536(94)00151-i
369.
Jöckel K-H Ahrens W Pohlabeln H Bolm-Audorff U Müller KM Lung cancer risk and welding: results from a case–control study in GermanyAm J Ind Med1998 33313320
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199804)33:4<313::aid-ajim1>3.0.co;2-v
370.
Risch HA Howe GR Jain M Burch JD Holowaty EJ Miller AB Are female smokers at higher risk for lung cancer than male smokers? A case–control analysis by histologic typeAm J Epidemiol1993 138281293
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116857
371.
Risch HA Howe GR Jain M Burch JD Holowaty EJ Miller AB Are female smokers at higher risk for lung cancer than male smokers? [Abstract]Am J Epidemiol1992 1361015
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116857
372.
Jain M Burch JD Howe GR Risch HA Miller AB Dietary factors and risk of lung cancer: results from a case–control study, Toronto, 1981–85Int J Cancer1990 45287293
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910450214
373.
Järup L Pershagen G Arsenic exposure, smoking, and lung cancer in smelter workers - a case–control studyAm J Epidemiol1991 134545551
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116128
374.
Pershagen G Wall S Taube A Linnman L On the interaction between occupational arsenic exposure and smoking and its relationship to lung cancerScand J Work Environ Health1981 7302309
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.2544
375.
Sandström A Wall S Lung cancer, smoking and smelter work in an occupational cohortInt J Epidemiol1995 2410711077
Not in our library10.1093/ije/24.6.1071
376.
Järvholm B Larsson S Hagberg S Olling S Ryd W Torén K Quantitative importance of asbestos as a cause of lung cancer in a Swedish industrial city: a case-referent studyEur Respir J1993 612711275
Not in our library
377.
Jedrychowski W Becher H Wahrendorf J Basa-Cierpialek Z Gomola K Effect of tobacco smoking on various histological types of lung cancerJ Cancer Res Clin Oncol1992 118276282
Not in our library10.1007/bf01208616
378.
Jedrychowski W Becher H Wahrendorf J Basa-Cierpialek Z A case–control study of lung cancer with special reference to the effect of air pollution in PolandJ Epidemiol Community Health1990 44114120
Not in our library10.1136/jech.44.2.114
379.
Becher H Jedrychowski W Flak E Gomola K Wahrendorf J Lung cancer, smoking and employment in foundriesScand J Work Environ Health1989 153842
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.1884
380.
Jedrychowski W Becher H Wahrendorf J Flak E Basa-Cierpiałek Z Łączny wpływ palenia tytoniu, czynników zawodowych i zanieczyszczeń powietrza atmosferycznego na ryzyko raka oskrzela. Wyniki badań retrospektywnych w Krakowie (Joint influence of the tobacco smoking, occupational factors and atmospheric air pollution on the risk of bronchial cancer. Results of the retrospective investigations in Cracow)Nowotwory1989 396575
Not in our library
381.
Jedrychowski W Becher H Flak E Gomola K Wahrendorf J Heidelberg K Badania kliniczno-kontrolne nad rakiem płuc. Palenie tytoniu i zatrudnienie w przemyśle metalurgicznym. (A case control study on lung cancer: smoking and employment in foundries)Przegl Lek1989 46329333
Not in our library
382.
Jedrychowski W Becher H Wahrendorf J Basa-Cierpiałek Z Gomoła K Wpływ palenia tytoniu na powstawanie różnych typów histologicznych raka płuca. (Effect of smoking on development of different histological types of lung cancer)Pneumonol Alergol Pol1992 603037
Not in our library
383.
Jiang MH Liao ZS A case–control study of 125 lung cancer cases in NanchangTumor1987 746
Not in our library
384.
Katsouyanni K Trichopoulos D Kalandidi A Tomos P Riboli E A case–control study of air pollution and tobacco smoking in lung cancer among women in Athens.Prev Med1991 20271278
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(91)90026-z
385.
Jussawalla DJ Jain DK Lung cancer in Greater Bombay: correlations with religion and smoking habitsBr J Cancer1979 40437448
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1979.199
386.
Friedman GD Tekawa I Sadler M Sidney S Shopland DR, Burns DM, Garfinkel L, Samet JMSmoking and mortality: the Kaiser Permanente experienceChanges in cigarette-related disease risks and their implications for prevention and control1997 Rockville, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute477499[Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph No. 8.] NIH Pub. No. 97–4213. http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/8/m8_6.pdf
Not in our library
387.
Sidney S Tekawa IS Friedman GD A prospective study of cigarette tar yield and lung cancerCancer Causes Control1993 4310
Not in our library10.1007/bf00051707
388.
Sidney S Tekawa IS Friedman GD Sadler MC Tashkin DP Mentholated cigarette use and lung cancerArch Intern Med1995 155727732
Not in our library
389.
Selby JV Friedman GD Epidemiologic evidence of an association between body iron stores and risk of cancerInt J Cancer1988 41677682
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910410507
390.
van den Eeden SK Friedman GD Forced expiratory volume (1 second) and lung cancer incidence and mortalityEpidemiology1992 3253257
Not in our library10.1097/00001648-199205000-00011
391.
Kanellakis A Trichopoulos D Michalakopoulos N Margoudakis S Kanellaki K Xirouchaki E Kalapothaki V The relationship between smoking of Greek cigarettes and the development of lung cancerMateria Medica Greca1976 4351355
Not in our library
392.
Trichopoulos D Kalandidi A Tzonou A Incidence and distribution of lung cancer in GreeceExcerpta Medica International Congress Series1982 5581017
Not in our library
393.
Katsouyanni K Trichopoulos D Kalandidi A Tomos P Riboli E A case–control study of air pollution and tobacco smoking in lung cancer among women in AthensPrev Med1991 20271278
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(91)90026-z
394.
Kaufman DW Palmer JR Rosenberg L Stolley P Warshauer E Shapiro S Tar content of cigarettes in relation to lung cancerAm J Epidemiol1989 129703711
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115185
395.
Keller JE Howe HL Risk factors for lung cancer among nonsmoking Illinois residentsEnviron Res1993 60111
Not in our library10.1006/enrs.1993.1001
396.
Khuder SA Dayal HH Mutgi AB Willey JC Dayal G Effect of cigarette smoking on major histological types of lung cancer in menLung Cancer1998 221521
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(98)00068-3
397.
Kihara M Noda K Kihara M Distribution of GSTM1 null genotype in relation to gender, age and smoking status in Japanese lung cancer patientsPharmacogenetics1995 5S74S79
Not in our library10.1097/00008571-199512001-00005
398.
Kihara M Noda K Lung cancer risk of the GSTM1 null genotype is enhanced in the presence of the GSTP1 mutated genotype in male Japanese smokersCancer Lett1999 1375360
Not in our library10.1016/s0304-3835(98)00337-1
399.
Kinlen LJ Willows AN Goldblatt P Yudkin J Tea consumption and cancerBr J Cancer1988 58397401
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1988.227
400.
Kjuus H Skjærven R Langård S Lien JT Aamodt T A case-referent study of lung cancer, occupational exposures and smoking: I Comparison of title-based and exposure-based occupational informationScand J Work Environ Health1986 12193202
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.2158
401.
Kjuus H Skjaerven R Langard S Lien JT Aamodt T A case-referent study of lung cancer, occupational exposures and smoking: II Role of asbestos exposureScand J Work Environ Health1986 12203209
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.2157
402.
Kjuus H Langård S Skjærven R A case-referent study of lung cancer, occupational exposures and smoking. III Etiologic fraction of occupational exposuresScand J Work Environ Health1986 12210215
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.2156
403.
Knekt P Vitamin E and smoking and the risk of lung cancerAnn N Y Acad Sci1993 686280288
Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb39187.x
404.
Knekt P Seppänen R Järvinen R Virtamo J Hyvönen L Pukkala E Teppo L Dietary cholesterol, fatty acids, and the risk of lung cancer among menNutr Cancer1991 16267275
Not in our library10.1080/01635589109514165
405.
Knekt P Heliövaara M Rissanen A Aromaa A Seppänen R Teppo L Pukkala E Leanness and lung-cancer riskInt J Cancer1991 49208213
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910490211
406.
Knekt P Järvinen R Seppänen R Heliövaara M Teppo L Pukkala E Aromaa A Dietary flavonoids and the risk of lung cancer and other malignant neoplasmsAm J Epidemiol1997 146223230
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009257
407.
Knekt P Järvinen R Seppänen R Rissanen A Aromaa A Heinonen OP Albanes D Heinonen M Pukkala E Teppo L Dietary antioxidants and the risk of lung cancerAm J Epidemiol1991 134471479
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116118
408.
Ko Y-C Lee C-H Chen M-J Huang C-C Chang W-Y Lin H-J Wang H-Z Chang P-Y Risk factors for primary lung cancer among non-smoking women in TaiwanInt J Epidemiol1997 262431
Not in our library10.1093/ije/26.1.24
409.
Kohlmeier L Arminger G Bartolomeycik S Bellach B Rehm J Thamm M Pet birds as an independent risk factor for lung cancer: case–control studyBMJ1992 305986992
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.305.6860.986
410.
Koo LC Ho JH-C Saw D Is passive smoking an added risk factor for lung cancer in Chinese women?J Exp Clin Cancer Res1984 3277283
Not in our library
411.
Lam TH Cheng KK Aoki M, Hisamichi S, Tominaga SPassive smoking is a risk factor for lung cancer in never smoking women in Hong KongSmoking and health 1987. Proceedings of the 6th World Conference on Smoking and Health, Tokyo, 9–12 November 19871988 Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (Biomedical Division)279281International Congress Series No. 780
Not in our library
412.
Koo LC Ho JH-C Saw D Active and passive smoking among female lung cancer patients and controls in Hong KongJ Exp Clin Cancer Res1983 4367375
Not in our library
413.
Koo LC Ho JH-C Lee N An analysis of some risk factors for lung cancer in Hong KongInt J Cancer1985 35149155
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910350202
414.
Koo LC Lee N Ho JH-C Do cooking fuels pose a risk for lung cancer? A case–control study of women in Hong KongEcology of Disease1983 2255265
Not in our library
415.
Koulumies M Smoking and pulmonary carcinomaActa Radiol1953 39255260
Not in our library10.3109/00016925309136710
416.
Kreuzer M Kreienbrock L Gerken M Heinrich J Bruske-Hohlfeld I Muller K-M Wichmann HE Risk factors for lung cancer in young adultsAm J Epidemiol1998 14710281037
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009396
417.
Kreienbrock L Wichmann H-E Gerken M Heinrich J Goetze H-J Kreuzer M Keller G The German radon project - feasibility of methods and first resultsRadiat Prot Dosimetry1992 45643649
Not in our library
418.
Jahn I Ahrens W Brüske-Hohlfeld I Kreuzer M Möhner M Pohlabeln H Wichmann H-E Jöckel K-H Occupational risk factors for lung cancer in women: results of a case–control study in GermanyAm J Ind Med1999 3690100
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199907)36:1<90::aid-ajim13>3.0.co;2-v
419.
Kreyberg L Lung cancer and tobacco smoking in NorwayBr J Cancer1955 9495510
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1955.52
420.
Kreyberg L The significance of histological typing in the study of the epidemiology of primary epithelial lung tumours: A study of 466 casesBr J Cancer1954 8199208
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1954.19
421.
Kreyberg HJA A study of tobacco smoking in NorwayBr J Cancer1954 81333
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1954.2
422.
Kubík A The influence of smoking and other etiopathogenetic factors on the incidence of bronchogenic carcinoma and chronic nonspecific respiratory diseasesCzech Med1984 72534
Not in our library
423.
Kubík A Křivinka R Stašek V Švandová E Křivánek J Neumann V Screening for lung cancer high-risk groupsScand J Respir Dis1970 51290300
Not in our library
424.
Lam TH Kung ITM Wong CM Lam WK Kleevens JWL Saw D Hsu C Seneviratne S Lam SY Lo KK Smoking, passive smoking and histological types in lung cancer in Hong Kong Chinese womenBr J Cancer1987 56673678
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1987.264
425.
Lam WK A clinical and epidemiological study of carcinoma of lung in Hong Kong ThesisUniversity of Hong Kong1985
Not in our library
426.
Lam WK So SY Yu DYC Clinical features of bronchogenic carcinoma in Hong Kong: review of 480 patientsCancer1983 52369376
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19830715)52:2<369::aid-cncr2820520231>3.0.co;2-7
427.
Lange P Nyboe J Appleyard M Jensen G Schnohr P Relationship of the type of tobacco and inhalation pattern to pulmonary and total mortalityEur Respir J1992 511111117
Not in our library
428.
Lange P Nyboe J Appleyard M Jensen G Schnohr P Tobak, lungekraeft og kronisk obstruktiv lungesygdom. Resultater fra Osterbroundersøgelsen. (Tobacco, lung cancer and chronic obstructive lung disease. Results from the Osterbro study)Ugeskr Laeger1993 15523332337
Not in our library
429.
Lange P Nyboe J Appleyard M Jensen G Schnohr P Ventilatory function and chronic mucus hypersecretion as predictors of death from lung cancerAm Rev Respir Dis1990 141613617
Not in our library10.1164/ajrccm/141.3.613
430.
Lange P Nyboe J Mortality in relation to the type of tobacco smoked [Abstract]Eur Respir J1990 3S10164S165S
Not in our library
431.
Laurila AL Anttila T Läärä E Bloigu A Virtamo J Albanes D Leinonen M Saikku P Serological evidence of an association between chlamydia pneumoniae infection and lung cancerInt J Cancer1997 743134
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19970220)74:1<31::aid-ijc6>3.0.co;2-1
432.
Virtamo J Taylor PR Huttunen JK Edwards BK Järvinen R Haapakoski J Hartman A Haukka J Heinonen OP Albanes D Predictive value of current cigarette smoking, pack years and tar exposure in the estimation of lung cancer risk [Abstract]Lung Cancer1991 7Suppl6
Not in our library
433.
Woodson K Stewart C Barrett M Bhat NK Virtamo J Taylor PR Albanes D Effect of vitamin intervention on the relationship between GSTM1, smoking, and lung cancer risk among male smokersCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1999 8965970
Not in our library
434.
Laussmann D Mehnert W-H Zur kombinierten Wirkung von beruflicher Tätigkeit im Uranerzbergbau, Silikoseerkrankung und Tabakrauchen auf das Lungenkrebsrisiko bei Männern. Eine Fall-Kontroll-Studie im Kreis Aue/Sachsen. Vorläufige Ergebnisse. (Combined effects of employment in uranium ore mines, silicosis, and tobacco smoking on the lung cancer risk in men. A case–control study in the county Aue/Saxony. Preliminary results)Wissenschaft und Umwelt1992 5763
Not in our library
435.
Lei Y-X Cai W-C Chen Y-Z Du Y-X Some lifestyle factors in human lung cancer: a case–control study of 792 lung cancer cases. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 14Suppl 1S121S136
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90218-4
436.
Le Marchand L Sivaraman L Pierce L Seifried A Lum A Wilkens LR Lau AF Associations of CYP1A1, GSTM1, and CYP2E1 polymorphisms with lung cancer suggest cell type specificities to tobacco carcinogensCancer Res1998 5848584863
Not in our library
437.
Létourneau EG Krewski D Choi NW Goddard MJ McGregor RG Zielinski JM Du J Case–control study of residential radon and lung cancer in Winnipeg, Manitoba, CanadaAm J Epidemiol1994 140310322
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117253
438.
Levin ML Etiology of lung cancer: present statusN Y State J Med1954 54769777
Not in our library
439.
Levin ML Goldstein H Gerhardt PR Cancer and tobacco smoking. A preliminary reportJAMA1950 143336338
Not in our library10.1001/jama.1950.02910390008002
440.
Levin ML Smoking and lung cancer: a reviewProceedings third national cancer conference1956 Philadelphia: J.B Lippincott Co473478
Not in our library
441.
Liaw K-M Chen C-J Mortality attributable to cigarette smoking in Taiwan: a 12-year follow-up studyTob Control1998 7141148
Not in our library10.1136/tc.7.2.141
442.
Council of EuropeLung cancer in Western Europe. 3rd edition1978 Strasbourg: Council of Europe
Not in our library
443.
Lickint F Ätiologie und Prophylaxe des Lungenkrebses als ein Problem der Gewerbehygiene und des Tabakrauches1953 Dresden and Leipzig: Theodor Steinkopf
Not in our library
444.
Lickint F Der Tabakrauch als Ursache des Lungenkrebses. Spezieler Teil IV. Atiologie und Prophylaxe des Lungenkrebses. (Tobacco smoke as a cause of lung cancer. Special section IV.)Etiology and prophylaxis of lung cancer1953 Dresden: Theodor Steinkopff76102
Not in our library
445.
McDonald JC Liddell FDK Dufresne A McDonald AD The 1891–1920 birth cohort of Quebec chrysotile miners and millers: mortality 1976–88Br J Ind Med1993 5010731081
Not in our library10.1136/oem.50.12.1073
446.
Liddell FDK McDonald JC Thomas DC Methods of cohort analysis: appraisal by application to asbestos miningJ R Stat Soc1977 140469491
Not in our library
447.
Liddell FDK Thomas DC Gibbs JW McDonald JC Fibre exposure and mortality from pneumoconiosis, respiratory and abdominal malignancies in chrysotile production in Quebec, 1926–75Singapore Ann Acad Med1984 13Suppl 2340344
Not in our library
448.
Liddell FDK McDonald AD McDonald JC Dust exposure and lung cancer in Quebec chrysotile miners and millersAnn Occup Hyg1998 42720
Not in our library10.1016/s0003-4878(97)00053-7
449.
McDonald JC Liddell FDK Gibbs GW Eyssen GE McDonald AD Dust exposure and mortality in chrysotile mining, 1910–75Br J Ind Med1980 371124
Not in our library10.1136/oem.37.1.11
450.
Liu J-Z Hu H-S Hu Y-H Lu P Hao L-Y A study on the relation between indoor exhaust and lung cancerIn Proceedings of Indoor Air1993 1489492
Not in our library
451.
Liu Q Sasco AJ Riboli E Hu MX Indoor air pollution and lung cancer in Guangzhou, People's Republic of ChinaAm J Epidemiol1993 137145154
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116654
452.
Liu Z He X Chapman RS Smoking and other risk factors for lung cancer in Xuanwei, ChinaInt J Epidemiol1991 202631
Not in our library10.1093/ije/20.1.26
453.
Liu ZY He XZ Huang CF Dan DY A case–control study of lung cancer risk factors in XuanweiZhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi1990 117983
Not in our library
454.
He X Chen W Liu Z Chapman RS An epidemiological study of lung cancer in Xuan Wei County, China: Current progress. Case–control study on lung cancer and cooking fuelEnviron Health Perspect1991 94913
Not in our library10.1289/ehp.94-1567943
455.
Liu B-Q Peto R Chen Z-M Boreham J Wu Y-P Li J-Y Campbell TC Chen J-S Emerging tobacco hazards in China: 1. Retrospective proportional mortality study of one million deathsBMJ1998 31714111422
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.317.7170.1411
456.
Liu XY Li SG The survey of smoking and 111 lung cancer casesActa Acad Med Wuhan1981 107880
Not in our library
457.
Lombar HL Huyck EP An epidemiological study of lung cancer among femalesGrowth1968 324156
Not in our library
458.
Lombard HL An epidemiological study in lung cancerCancer1965 1813011309
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(196510)18:10<1301::aid-cncr2820181016>3.0.co;2-l
459.
Lombard HL Snegireff LS An epidemiological study of lung cancerCancer1959 12406413
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(195903/04)12:2<406::aid-cncr2820120225>3.0.co;2-2
460.
Lubin JH Jun-Yao L Xiang-Zhen X Shu Kan C Qing-Sheng L Li-Fen Y Jian-Zhang W Lan Y Blot WJ Risk of lung cancer among cigarette and pipe smokers in southern ChinaInt J Cancer1992 51390395
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910510310
461.
Yao SX Lubin JH Qiao YL Boice JD Jr Li JY Cai SK Zhang FM Blot WJ Exposure to radon progeny, tobacco use and lung cancer in a case–control study in Southern ChinaRadiat Res1994 138326336
Not in our library
462.
Swanson CA Mao BL Li JY Lubin JH Yao SX Wang JZ Cai SK Hou Y Luo QS Blot WJ Dietary determinants of lung-cancer risk: results from a case–control study in Yunnan Province, ChinaInt J Cancer1992 50876880
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910500609
463.
Lubin JH Blot WJ Berrino F Flamant R Gillis CR Kunze M Schmahl D Visco G Patterns of lung cancer risk according to type of cigarette smokedInt J Cancer1984 33569576
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910330504
464.
Lubin JH Blot WJ Assessment of lung cancer risk factors by histologic categoryJ Natl Cancer Inst1984 73383389
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/73.2.383
465.
Lubin JH Richter BS Blot WJ Lung cancer risk with cigar and pipe useJ Natl Cancer Inst1984 73377381
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/73.2.377
466.
Lubin JH Blot WJ Berrino F Flamant R Gillis CR Kunze M Schmähl D Visco G Modifying risk of developing lung cancer by changing habits of cigarette smokingBr Med J1984 28819531956
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.288.6435.1953
467.
Lubin JH Modifying risk of developing lung cancer by changing habits of cigarette smoking [Letter]Br Med J1984 289921
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.289.6449.921
468.
Lubin JH Fraumeni JF Jr Effect on mortality of switching from cigarettes to pipes or cigars. American study supported conclusions [Letter]BMJ1998 316863
Not in our library
469.
Lynch CJ Yu W-K Smoking practices in selected western European countriesWorld Smoking Health1981 6413
Not in our library
470.
Luo R-X Wu B Yi Y-N Huang Z-W Lin R-T Indoor burning coal air pollution and lung cancer - a case–control study in Fuzhou, China. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 14Suppl 1S113S119
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90217-2
471.
Maclennan R Da Costa J Day NE Law CH Ng YK Shanmugaratnam K Risk factors for lung cancer in Singapore Chinese, a population with high female incidence ratesInt J Cancer1977 20854860
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910200606
472.
Andersen A Berge SR Engeland A Norseth T Exposure to nickel compounds and smoking in relation to incidence of lung and nasal cancer among nickel refinery workersOccup Environ Med1996 53708713
Not in our library10.1136/oem.53.10.708
473.
Magnus K Andersen A Høgetveit AC Cancer of respiratory organs among workers at a nickel refinery in Norway. Second reportInt J Cancer1982 30681685
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910300602
474.
Marsh GM Stone RA Esmen NA Gula MJ Gause CK Petersen NJ Meaney FJ Rodney S Prybylski D A case–control study of lung cancer mortality in six Gila Basin, Arizona smelter townsEnviron Res1997 755672
Not in our library10.1006/enrs.1997.3768
475.
Marsh GM Stone RA Esmen NA Gula MJ Gause CK Petersen NJ Meaney FJ Rodney S Prybylski D A case–control study of lung cancer mortality in four rural Arizona smelter townsArch Environ Health1998 531528
Not in our library10.1080/00039899809605685
476.
Martischnig KM Newell DJ Barnsley WC Cowan WK Feinmann EL Oliver E Unsuspected exposure to asbestos and bronchogenic carcinomaBr Med J1977 1746749
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.1.6063.746
477.
Mastrangelo G Zambon P Simonato L Rizzi P A case-referent study investigating the relationship between exposure to silica dust and lung cancerInt Arch Occup Environ Health1988 60299302
Not in our library10.1007/bf00378477
478.
Matos E Vilensky M Boffetta P Kogevinas M Lung cancer and smoking: a case–control study in Buenos Aires, ArgentinaLung Cancer1998 21155163
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(98)00055-5
479.
Matsuda M Shimizu T Hattori M The etiology of lung cancerShindan to Chiryo (Diagnosis and Treatment)1966 54377388
Not in our library
480.
McConnell RB Gordon KCT Jones T Occupational and personal factors in the aetiology of carcinoma of the lungLancet1952 263651656
Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(52)91501-8
481.
McDuffie HH Klaassen DJ Cockcroft DW Dosman JA Farming and exposure to chemicals in male lung cancer patients and their siblingsJ Occup Med1988 305559
Not in our library
482.
McLaughlin JK Jing-Qiong C Dosemeci M Rong-An C Rexing SH Zhien W Hearl FJ McCawley MA Blot WJ A nested case–control study of lung cancer among silica exposed workers in ChinaBr J Ind Med1992 49167171
Not in our library10.1136/oem.49.3.167
483.
Lee PN Mortality from smoking-associated diseases in Great Britain. A statistical analysis of British data from the U.S.A.-U.K.-Norway migrant study1979 Sutton, Surrey: P N Lee Statistics and Computing Ltdwww.pnlee.co.uk/Reports.htm. Download LEE1979B
Not in our library
484.
Lee PN Garfinkel L Mortality and type of cigarette smokedJ Epidemiol Community Health1981 351622
Not in our library10.1136/jech.35.1.16
485.
Todd GF Hunt BM Lambert PM Four cardiorespiratory symptoms as predictors of mortalityJ Epidemiol Community Health1978 32267274
Not in our library10.1136/jech.32.4.267
486.
Miller GH Golish JA Cox CE Chacko DC Women and lung cancer: a comparison of active and passive smokers with nonexposed nonsmokersCancer Detect Prev1994 18421430
Not in our library
487.
Mills CA Porter MM Tobacco smoking habits and cancer of the mouth and respiratory systemCancer Res1950 10539542
Not in our library
488.
Mollo F Pira E Piolatto G Bellis D Burlo P Andreozzi A Bontempi S Negri E Lung adenocarcinoma and indicators of asbestos exposureInt J Cancer1995 60289293
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910600302
489.
Kuller LH Ockene JK Meilahn E Wentworth DN Svendsen KH Neaton JD Cigarette smoking and mortalityPrev Med1991 20638654
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(91)90060-h
490.
Friedewald WT Kuller LH Ockene JK Hakama M, Beral V, Cullen JW, Parkin DMPrimary prevention of cancer: relevant Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial ResultsEvaluating effectiveness of primary prevention of cancer1990 Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer157170IARC Scientific Publications No. 103
Not in our library
491.
Kuller LH Ockene JK Meilahn E Svendsen K Relation of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) to lung cancer mortality in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT)Am J Epidemiol1990 132265274
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115656
492.
Ockene JK Kuller LH Svendsen KH Meilahn E The relationship of smoking cessation to coronary heart disease and lung cancer in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT)Am J Public Health1990 80954958
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.80.8.954
493.
Murata M Takayama K Choi BCK Pak AWP A nested case–control study on alcohol drinking, tobacco smoking, and cancerCancer Detect Prev1996 20557565
Not in our library
494.
Mzileni MO Sitas F Steyn K Carrara H Bekker P Lung cancer, smoking and environmental pollution in the Northern Province, South Africa. In Tobacco: the growing epidemic. Abstract book10th World Conference on Tobacco or Health, Beijing, China, 24–28 August1997 199796OS 254
Not in our library
495.
Nam CB Hummer RA Rogers RG Underlying and multiple causes of death related to smokingPopulation Research and Policy Review1994 13305325
Not in our library
496.
Notani PN Rao DN Sirsat MV Sanghvi LD A study of lung cancer in relation to bidi smoking in different religious communities in BombayIndian J Cancer1977 14115121
Not in our library
497.
Notani P Sanghvi LD A retrospective study of lung cancer in BombayBr J Cancer1974 29477482
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1974.100
498.
Notani PN Shah P Jayant K Balakrishnan V Occupation and cancers of the lung and bladder: a case–control study in BombayInt J Epidemiol1993 22185191
Not in our library10.1093/ije/22.2.185
499.
Nõu E Hillerdal O Total tobacco consumption in an unselected bronchial carcinoma populationEur J Respir Dis1981 62152159
Not in our library
500.
O'Driscoll BR The lung cancer risk of long term ex-smokers is much less than that of smokers but much higher than that of non-smokers [Abstract]Thorax1997 52Suppl 6A31
Not in our library
501.
Munavvar M O'Driscoll BR Lung cancer in ex-smokers [Abstract]Thorax1995 50473
Not in our library
502.
Ormos J Karácsonyi G Biliczki F Szőnyi F Lung cancer in the Hungarian plainNeoplasma1969 16667675
Not in our library
503.
Osann KE Anton-Culver H Kurosaki T Taylor T Sex differences in lung-cancer risk associated with cigarette smokingInt J Cancer1993 544448
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910540108
504.
Osann KE Lung cancer in women: the importance of smoking, family history of cancer, and medical history of respiratory diseaseCancer Res1991 5148934897
Not in our library
505.
Osann K Smoking and other risk factors for lung cancer in women by cell type [Abstract]Am J Epidemiol1982 116563
Not in our library
506.
Parkin DM Vizcaino AP Skinner MEG Ndhlovu A Cancer patterns and risk factors in the African population of southwestern Zimbabwe, 1963–1977Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1994 3537547
Not in our library
507.
Pastorino U Berrino F Gervasio A Pesenti V Riboli E Crosignani P Proportion of lung cancers due to occupational exposureInt J Cancer1984 33231237
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910330211
508.
Pawlęga J Rachtan J Dyba T Evaluation of certain risk factors for lung cancer in Cracow (Poland): a case–control studyActa Oncol1997 36471476
Not in our library10.3109/02841869709001301
509.
Pernu J An epidemiological study on cancer of the digestive organs and respiratory system: a study based on 7078 casesIn Ann Med Intern Fenn1960 49Suppl 331117Helsinki: Duodecim
Not in our library
510.
Pershagen G Åkerblom G Axelson O Glavensjö B Damber L Desai G Enflo A Lagarde F Mellander H Svartengren M Residential radon exposure and lung cancer in SwedenN Engl J Med1994 330159164
Not in our library10.1056/nejm199401203300302
511.
Peto R Speizer FE Cochrane AL Moore F Fletcher CM Tinker CM Higgins ITT Gray RG Richards SM Gilliland J The relevance in adults of air-flow obstruction, but not of mucus hypersecretion, to mortality from chronic lung disease. Results from 20 years of prospective observationAm Rev Respir Dis1983 128491500
Not in our library10.1164/arrd.1983.128.3.491
512.
Pezzotto SM Poletto L Occupation and histopathology of lung cancer: a case–control study in Rosario, ArgentinaAm J Ind Med1999 36437443
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199910)36:4<437::aid-ajim4>3.0.co;2-c
513.
Pezzotto SM Mahuad R Bay ML Morini JC Poletto L Variation in smoking-related lung cancer risk factors by cell type among men in Argentina: a case–control studyCancer Causes Control1993 4231237
Not in our library10.1007/bf00051318
514.
Pike MC Jing JS Rosario IP Henderson BE Menck HR Breslow NE, Whittemore ASOccupation: "Explanation" of an apparent air pollution related localized excess of lung cancer in Los Angeles CountyEnergy and Health1979 Philadelphia: SIAM Inst Mathematics Society316
Not in our library
515.
Pisani P Berrino F Macaluso M Pastorino U Crosignani P Baldasseroni A Carrots, green vegetables and lung cancer: A case–control studyInt J Epidemiol1986 15463468
Not in our library10.1093/ije/15.4.463
516.
Poffijn A Feider M Kreienbrock L Tirmarche M Recent figures of case–control recruitment in the international Ardennes-Eifel study on radon and lung cancerEnviron Int1996 2Suppl 1S1045S1048
Not in our library
517.
Poffijn A Tirmarche M Kreienbrock L Kayser P Darby S Radon and lung cancer: Protocol and procedures of the multicentre studies in the Ardennes-Eifel region, Brittany and the Massif Central regionRadiat Prot Dosimetry1992 45651655
Not in our library
518.
Polednak AP Janerich DT Lung cancer in relation to residence in census tracts with toxic-waste disposal sites: a case–control study in Niagara County, New YorkEnviron Res1989 482941
Not in our library10.1016/s0013-9351(89)80082-9
519.
Prescott E Osler M Hein HO Borsch-Johnsen K Lange P Schnohr P Vestbo J Gender and smoking-related risk of lung cancer. The Copenhagen Center for Prospective Population StudiesEpidemiology1998 97983
Not in our library
520.
Prescott E Osler M Andersen PK Hein HO Borch-Johnsen K Lange P Schnohr P Vestbo J Mortality in women and men in relation to smokingInt J Epidemiol1998 272732
Not in our library10.1093/ije/27.1.27
521.
Qiao Y-L Taylor PR Yao S-X Schatzkin A Mao B-L Lubin J Rao J-Y McAdams M Xuan X-Z Li J-Y Relation of radon exposure and tobacco use to lung cancer among tin miners in Yunnan Province, ChinaAm J Ind Med1989 16511521
Not in our library10.1002/ajim.4700160504
522.
Lubin JH Qiao Y-L Taylor PR Yao S-X Schatzkin A Mao B-L Rao J-Y Xuan X-Z Li J-Y Quantitative evaluation of the radon and lung cancer association in a case–control study of Chinese tin minersCancer Res1990 50174180
Not in our library
523.
Taylor PR Qiao Y-L Schatzkin A Yao S-X Lubin J Mao B-L Rao J-Y McAdams M Xuan X-Z Li J-Y Relation of arsenic exposure to lung cancer among tin miners in Yunnan Province, ChinaBr J Ind Med1989 46881886
Not in our library10.1136/oem.46.12.881
524.
Qiao Y-L Taylor PR Yao S-X Erozan YS Luo X-C Barrett MJ Yan Q-Y Giffen CA Huang S-Q Maher MM Risk factors and early detection of lung cancer in a cohort of Chinese tin minersAnn Epidemiol1997 7533541
Not in our library10.1016/s1047-2797(97)00115-4
525.
Rachtan J Sokolowski A Risk factors for lung cancer among women in PolandLung Cancer1997 18137145
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(97)00062-7
526.
Radzikowska E Rowińska-Zakrzewska E Rodzinne grupowanie się zachorowań na raka płuca wśród krewnych chorych na raka płuca. (Familial aggregation of lung cancer in families of lung cancer patients)Pneumonol Alergol Pol1994 62444449
Not in our library
527.
Randig K The aetiology of lung cancerDtsch Med Wochenschr1955 80718724
Not in our library10.1055/s-0028-1116500
528.
Restrepo HE Correa P Haenszel W Brinton LA Franco A A case–control study of tobacco-related cancers in ColombiaBull Pan Am Health Org1989 23405413
Not in our library
529.
Rimington J The effect of filters on the incidence of lung cancer in cigarette smokersEnviron Res1981 24162166
Not in our library10.1016/0013-9351(81)90142-0
530.
Ronco G Ciccone G Mirabelli D Troia B Vineis P Occupation and lung cancer in two industrialized areas of Northern ItalyInt J Cancer1988 41354358
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910410306
531.
Roots I Drakoulis N Ploch M Heinemeyer G Loddenkemper R Minks T Nitz M Otte F Koch M Debrisoquine hydroxylation phenotype, acetylation phenotype, and ABO blood groups as genetic host factors of lung cancer riskKlin Wochenschr1988 668797
Not in our library
532.
Rothschild H Mulvey JJ An increased risk for lung cancer mortality associated with sugarcane farmingJ Natl Cancer Inst1982 68755760
Not in our library
533.
Saarikoski ST Voho A Reinikainen M Anttila S Karjalainen A Malaveille C Vainio H Husgafvel-Pursiainen K Hirvonen A Combined effect of polymorphic GST genes on individual susceptibility to lung cancerInt J Cancer1998 77516521
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19980812)77:4<516::aid-ijc7>3.0.co;2-x
534.
Sadowsky DA Gilliam AG Cornfield J The statistical association between smoking and carcinoma of the lungJ Natl Cancer Inst1953 1312371258
Not in our library
535.
Sankaranarayanan R Varghese C Duffy SW Padmakumary G Day NE Nair MK A case–control study of diet and lung cancer in Kerala, South IndiaInt J Cancer1994 58644649
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910580505
536.
Schwartz AG Swanson GM Lung carcinoma in African Americans and whites. A population-based study in Metropolitan Detroit, MichiganCancer1997 794552
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19970101)79:1<45::aid-cncr7>3.0.co;2-l
537.
Swanson GM Lin C-S Burns PB Diversity in the association between occupation and lung cancer among black and white menCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1993 2313320
Not in our library
538.
Segi M Fukushima I Fujisaku S Kurihara M Saito S Asano K Kamoi M An epidemiological study on cancer in JapanJpn J Cancer Res1957 48Suppl163
Not in our library
539.
Segi M Kurihara M Ishikawa S Haenszel W Epidemiological survey on lung cancer and smokingLung Cancer1979 19157165
Not in our library
540.
Seow A Zhao B Poh W-T Teh M Eng P Wang Y-T Tan W-C Lee EJD Lee H-P NAT2 slow acetylator genotype is associated with increased risk of lung cancer among non-smoking Chinese women in SingaporeCarcinogenesis1999 2018771881
Not in our library10.1093/carcin/20.9.1877
541.
Shaw GL Falk RT Deslauriers J Frame JN Nesbitt JC Pass HI Issaq HJ Hoover RN Tucker MA Debrisoquine metabolism and lung cancer riskCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1995 44148
Not in our library
542.
Shimizu H Hisamichi S Motomiya M Oizumi K Konno K Hashimoto K Nakada T Risk of lung cancer by histologic type among smokers in Miyagi PrefectureJpn J Clin Oncol1986 16117121
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.jjco.a039126
543.
Siemiatycki J Krewski D Franco E Kaiserman M Associations between cigarette smoking and each of 21 types of cancer: a multi-site case–control studyInt J Epidemiol1995 24504514
Not in our library10.1093/ije/24.3.504
544.
Siemiatycki J Gérin M Richardson L Hubert J Kemper H Preliminary report of an exposure-based, case–control monitoring system for discovering occupational carcinogensTeratog Carcinog Mutagen1982 2169177
Not in our library10.1002/1520-6866(1990)2:2<169::aid-tcm1770020206>3.0.co;2-o
545.
Siemiatycki J Gérin M Dewar R Lakhani R Begin D Richardson L Simonato L, Fletcher AC, Saracci R, Thomas TLSilica and cancer associations from a multicancer occupational exposure case-referent studyOccupational exposure to silica and cancer risk1990 Lyon: IARC2942
Not in our library
546.
Siemiatycki J Dewar R Krewski D Désy M Richardson L Franco E Are the apparent effects of cigarette smoking on lung and bladder cancers due to uncontrolled confounding by occupational exposures?Epidemiology1994 55765
Not in our library10.1097/00001648-199401000-00010
547.
Parent M-E Siemiatycki J Renaud G Case–control study of exposure to carbon black in the occupational setting and risk of lung cancerAm J Ind Med1996 30285292
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199609)30:3<285::aid-ajim6>3.0.co;2-y
548.
Simarak S de Jong UW Breslow N Dahl CJ Ruckphaopunt K Scheelings P Maclennan R Cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx/larynx and lung in North Thailand: case–control study and analysis of cigar smokeBr J Cancer1977 36130140
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1977.163
549.
Sitas F Carrara HRO Patel M Hale M Bezwoda W Ruff P Laikier R Newton R Beral V Lu R, Mackay J, Niu S, Peto REpidemiology of smoking-related cancers in South AfricaTobacco: the growing epidemic. Proceedings of the Tenth World Conference on Tobacco or Health, 24–28 August 1997, Beijing, China2000 London, Berlin, Heidleberg: Springer-Verlag104105
Not in our library
550.
Sobue T Suzuki T Fujimoto I Matsuda M Doi O Mori T Furuse K Fukuoka M Yasumitsu T Kuwahara O Case–control study for lung cancer and cigarette smoking in Osaka, Japan: comparison with the results from western EuropeJpn J Cancer Res1994 85464473
Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.1994.tb02381.x
551.
Sobue T Suzuki T Fujimoto I Matsuda M Doi O Mori T Furuse K Fukuoka M Yasumitsu T Kuwahara O Lung cancer risk among exsmokersJpn J Cancer Res1991 82273279
Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.1991.tb01842.x
552.
Sobue T Yamaguchi N Suzuki T Fujimoto I Matsuda M Doi O Mori T Furuse K Fukuoka M Yasumitsu T Lung cancer incidence rate for male exsmokers according to age at cessation of smokingJpn J Cancer Res1993 84601607
Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.1993.tb02019.x
553.
Sobue T Suzuki T Horai T Matsuda M Fujimoto I Relationship between cigarette smoking and histologic type of lung cancer, with special reference to sex differenceJpn J Clin Oncol1988 18313
Not in our library10.1093/jjco/18.1.3
554.
Speizer FE Colditz GA Hunter DJ Rosner B Hennekens C Prospective study of smoking, antioxidant intake, and lung cancer in middle-aged women (USA)Cancer Causes Control1999 10475482
Not in our library10.1023/a:1008931526525
555.
Colditz GA The Nurses' Health Study: a cohort of US women followed since 1976J Am Med Womens Assoc1995 50404463
Not in our library
556.
Wiencke JK Spitz MR McMillan A Kelsey KT Lung cancer in Mexican-Hispanic and African-Americans is associated with the wild-type genotype of the NAD(P)H: quinone oxidoreductase polymorphismCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1997 68792
Not in our library
557.
Spitz MR Wu X Jiang H Hsu TC Mutagen sensitivity as a marker of cancer susceptibilityJ Cell Biochem1996 25Suppl8084
Not in our library
558.
Wu X Delclos GL Annegers JF Bondy ML Honn SE Henry B Hsu TC Spitz MR A case–control study of wood dust exposure, mutagen sensitivity, and lung cancer riskCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1995 4583588
Not in our library
559.
Ishibe N Wiencke JK Zuo Z-F McMillan A Spitz M Kelsey KT Susceptibility to lung cancer in light smokers associated with CYP1A1 polymorphisms in Mexican- and African-AmericansCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1997 610751080
Not in our library
560.
Wu X Shi H Jiang H Kemp B Hong WK Delclos GL Spitz MR Associations between cytochrome P4502E1 genotype, mutagen sensitivity, cigarette smoking and susceptibility to lung cancerCarcinogenesis1997 18967973
Not in our library10.1093/carcin/18.5.967
561.
Wu X Amos CI Kemp BL Shi H Jiang H Wan Y Spitz MR Cytochrome P450 2E1 DraI polymorphisms in lung cancer in minority populationsCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1998 71318
Not in our library
562.
Pillow PC Hursting SD Duphorne CM Jiang H Honn SE Chang S Spitz MR Case–control assessment of diet and lung cancer risk in African Americans and Mexican AmericansNutr Cancer1997 29169173
Not in our library10.1080/01635589709514620
563.
Wu X Spitz MR Lung cancer and wood dust exposureCancer Bulletin1995 47412416
Not in our library
564.
Kelsey KT Spitz MR Zuo ZF Wiencke JK Polymorphisms in the glutathione S-transferase class mu and theta genes interact and increase susceptibility to lung cancer in minority populations (Texas, United States)Cancer Causes Control1997 8554559
Not in our library10.1023/a:1018434027502
565.
Wu X Hsu TC Cao S Lee JJ Amos CI Spitz MR Deletion in poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase pseudogene and lung cancer riskCarcinogenesis1998 199398
Not in our library10.1093/carcin/19.1.93
566.
Jin X Wu X Roth JA Amos CI King TM Branch C Honn SE Spitz MR Higher lung cancer risk for younger African-Americans with the Pro/Pro p53 genotypeCarcinogenesis1995 1622052208
Not in our library10.1093/carcin/16.9.2205
567.
Staszewski J Smoking and cancer in PolandBr J Cancer1960 14419435
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1960.46
568.
Stayner LT Wegman DH Smoking, occupation, and histopathology of lung cancer: a case–control study with the use of the Third National Cancer SurveyJ Natl Cancer Inst1983 70421426
Not in our library
569.
Williams RR Horm JW Association of cancer sites with tobacco and alcohol consumption and socioeconomic status of patients: interview study from the Third National Cancer SurveyJ Natl Cancer Inst1977 58525547
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/58.3.525
570.
Stocks P Cancer incidence in North Wales and Liverpool region in relation to habits and environment1957 British Empire Cancer Campaign: 35th Annual Report. Supplement to Part II
Not in our library
571.
Stocks P Campbell JM Lung cancer death rates among non-smokers and pipe and cigarette smokers. An evaluation in relation to air pollution by benzpyrene and other substancesBr Med J1955 2923929
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.2.4945.923
572.
Stocks P Statistical survey of cancer in North Wales and Liverpool region in relation to habits and environment1975 London: HMSO: In British Enpire Cancer Campaign 35th Annual Report496501
Not in our library
573.
Stockwell HG Lyman GH Waltz J Peters JT Lung cancer in Florida: risks associated with residence in the central Florida phosphate mining regionAm J Epidemiol1988 1287884
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114961
574.
Stücker I de Waziers I Cenée S Bignon J Depierre A Milleron B Beaune P Hémon D GSTM1, smoking and lung cancer: a case–control studyInt J Epidemiol1999 28829835
Not in our library10.1093/ije/28.5.829
575.
Sun GF Shimojo N Pi JB Lee S Kumagai Y Gene deficiency of glutathione S-transferase μ isoform associated with susceptibility to lung cancer in a Chinese populationCancer Lett1997 113169172
Not in our library10.1016/s0304-3835(97)04612-0
576.
Suzuki I Hamada GS Zamboni MM Cordeiro PB Watanabe S Tsugane S Risk factors for lung cancer in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: a case–control studyLung Cancer1994 11179190
Not in our library10.1016/0169-5002(94)90538-x
577.
Sugimura H Suzuki I Hamada GS Iwase T Takahashi T Nagura K Iwata H Watanabe S Kino I Tsugane S Cytochrome P-450 IA1 genotype in lung cancer patients and controls in Rio de Janeiro, BrazilCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1994 3145148
Not in our library
578.
Suzuki T Sobue T Fujimoto I Doi O Tateishi R Association of adenocarcinoma of the lung with cigarette smoking by grade of differentiation and subtypeCancer Res1990 50444447
Not in our library
579.
Svensson C Pershagen G Klominek J Smoking and passive smoking in relation to lung cancer in womenActa Oncol1989 28623629
Not in our library10.3109/02841868909092282
580.
Svensson C Pershagen G Klominek J Lung cancer in women and type of dwelling in relation to radon exposureCancer Res1989 4918611865
Not in our library
581.
Pershagen G Liang Z-H Hrubec Z Svensson C Boice JD Jr Residential radon exposure and lung cancer in Swedish womenHealth Phys1992 63179186
Not in our library10.1097/00004032-199208000-00004
582.
Tang D Santella RM Blackwood AM Young T-L Mayer J Jaretzki A Grantham S Tsai W-Y Perera FP A molecular epidemiological case–control study of lung cancerCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1995 4341346
Not in our library
583.
Tang DL Rundle A Warburton D Santella RM Tsai W-Y Chiamprasert S Hsu YZ Perera FP Associations between both genetic and environmental biomarkers and lung cancer: evidence of a greater risk of lung cancer in women smokersCarcinogenesis1998 1919491953
Not in our library10.1093/carcin/19.11.1949
584.
Tang J-L Morris JK Wald NJ Hole D Shipley M Tunstall-Pedoe H Mortality in relation to tar yield of cigarettes: a prospective study of four cohortsBMJ1995 31115301533
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.311.7019.1530
585.
Tao X Zhu H Matanoski GM Peng J Case–control study of lung cancer and air pollution in Shanghai [Abstract]Epidemiology1996 745S
Not in our library
586.
Tenkanen L Hakulinen T Teppo L The joint effect of smoking and respiratory symptoms on risk of lung cancerInt J Epidemiol1987 16509515
Not in our library10.1093/ije/16.4.509
587.
Tenkanen L Teppo L Hakulinen T Smoking and cardiac symptoms as predictors of lung cancerJ Chronic Dis1987 4011211128
Not in our library10.1016/0021-9681(87)90079-8
588.
Tenkanen L Teppo L Migration, material status and smoking as risk determinant of cancerScand J Soc Med1987 156772
Not in our library10.1177/140349488701500203
589.
Tenkanen L Migration to towns, occupation, smoking, and lung cancer: experience from the Finnish-Norwegian lung cancer studyCancer Causes Control1993 4133141
Not in our library10.1007/bf00053154
590.
Tenkanen L Hakulinen T Hakama M Saxén E Sauna, dust and migration as risk factors in lung cancer among smoking and non-smoking males in FinlandInt J Cancer1985 35637642
Not in our library10.1002/ijc.2910350511
591.
Pedersen E Magnus K Mork T Hougen A Bjelke E Hakama M Saxén E Lung cancer in Finland and Norway, an epidemiological studyActa Pathol Microbiol Scand1969 Copenhagen: Munksgaard174Suppl 199
Not in our library
592.
Tizzano A Anglesio E Pandolfi AM Fumi di tabacco e tumori pulmonari; studio statisticoIl Cancro1965 18103131
Not in our library
593.
Tokarskaya ZB Okladnikova ND Belyaeva ZD Drozhko EG The influence of radiation and nonradiation factors on the lung cancer incidence among the workers of the nuclear enterprise MayakHealth Phys1995 69356366
Not in our library10.1097/00004032-199509000-00007
594.
Tokarskaia ZB Okladnikova ND Beliaeva ZD Otsenka vklada radiatsionnykh i neradiatsionnykh faktorov v razvitii raka legkogo u rabotnikov radiokhimicheskogo predpriiatiia. (Evaluation of radiation and non-radiation factors in the development of lung cancer in radiochemical plant employees)Vopr Onkol1994 40165170
Not in our library
595.
Tokarskaia ZB Okladnikova ND Beliaeva ZD Otsenka roli radiatsionnykh i ne radiatsionnykh faktorov v razvitii raka legkogo u rabotnikov radiokhimicheskogo predpriiatiia (soobshchenie 1). (An evaluation of the role of radiation and nonradiation factors in the development of lung cancer in workers at a radiochemical enterprise (1))Ter Arkh1996 683740
Not in our library
596.
Tokarskaia ZB Okladnikova ND Beliaeva ZD Aristov VP Vliianie radiatsionnykh i neradiatsionnykh faktorov na vozniknovenie razlichnykh gistologicheckikh tipov raka legkovo u rabotnikov radiokhimicheskogo predpriiatiia. (Effect of radiation and other factors on the pathogenesis of various histologic types of lung cancer in workers of radiochemical plants)Vopr Onkol1996 424347
Not in our library
597.
Tokarskaya ZB Okladnikova ND Belyaeva ZD Drozhko EG Multifactorial analysis of lung cancer dose–response relationships for workers at the Mayak nuclear enterpriseHealth Phys1997 73899905
Not in our library10.1097/00004032-199712000-00003
598.
Tousey PM Wolfe KW Mozeleski A Mohr DL Cantrell BB O'Donnell M Heath CW Blot WJ Determinants of the excessive rates of lung cancer in northeast FloridaSouth Med J1999 92493501
Not in our library10.1097/00007611-199905000-00009
599.
Tsugane S Watanabe S Sugimura H Arimoto H Shimosato Y Suemasu K Smoking, occupational and family history in lung cancer patients under fifty years of ageJpn J Clin Oncol1987 17309317
Not in our library
600.
Tulinius H Sigfússon N Sigvaldason H Bjarnadóttir K Tryggvadóttir L Risk factors for malignant diseases: A cohort study on a population of 22,946 IcelandersCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1997 6863873
Not in our library
601.
Tverdal A Thelle D Stensvold I Leren P Bjartveit K Mortality in relation to smoking history: 13 years' follow-up of 68,000 Norwegian men and women 35–49 yearsJ Clin Epidemiol1993 46475487
Not in our library10.1016/0895-4356(93)90025-v
602.
Ulmer WT Bronchialkarzinom in stadt und land unter besonderer beachtung des tabakrauchens Bochumer epidemiologische studie (Bronchial cancer in cities and rural districts in relation to smoking habits Epidemiological study on the city Bochum)Innere Medizin1982 9410416
Not in our library
603.
Veierød MB Laake P Thelle DS Dietary fat intake and risk of lung cancer: a prospective study of 51,452 Norwegian men and womenEur J Cancer Prev1997 6540549
Not in our library10.1097/00008469-199712000-00009
604.
Vutuc C Lung cancer risk and tar yields of cigarettes smoked1983 Winnipeg, Canada: In Proceedings of the Fifth World Conference on Smoking and Health2392421
Not in our library
605.
Vutuc C Kunze M Kunze MJ Tabakrauchen und Bronchuskarzinom. Relatives Risiko für Kreyberg I- und Kreyberg II-TumorenZentralblatt fur Bakteriologie Hygiene, I Abt Orig B1979 169470473
Not in our library
606.
Vutuc C Kunze M Teer-Exposition bei tabakkonsumierenden weiblichen Bronchuskarzinompatienten und einer VergleichspopulationPrax Pneumol1979 3311211124
Not in our library
607.
Vutuc C Gredler B Soziale Schicht und Bronchuskarzinom. Quantitative und qualitative Aspekte des ZigarettenkonsumsOnkologie1980 32225
Not in our library10.1159/000214739
608.
Vutuc C Kunze M Zigarettenkondensatexposition männlicher Bronchuskarzinom- patienten der Altersgruppe 41 bis 50 Jahre. (Cigarette condensate exposure of male bronchogenic carcinoma patients in the 41–50 age group)Offentl Gesundheitswes1981 43185188
Not in our library
609.
Vutuc C Kunze M Zigaretten-Rauchkondensat-Exposition und Berufsanamnese bei weiblichen Lungnkrebspatienten. (Cigarette smoke condensate exposure and occupational history. I Female lung cancer patients)Onkologie1981 4184187
Not in our library10.1159/000214907
610.
Vutuc C Kunze M Lungenkrebs bein Angehörigen der Berufsgruppe 'Metall- gewinnung und -verarbeitung'. (Lung cancer in members of the mining and metal working trades)Offentl Gesundheitswes1981 43511516
Not in our library
611.
Vutuc C Kunze M Lung cancer risk in women in relation to tar yields of cigarettesPrev Med1982 11713716
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(82)90033-0
612.
Vutuc C Kunze M Pontifex GCigarette tar exposure and occupation in female lung cancer patientsLung cancer. Etiology, epidemiology, prevention, early diagnosis, treatment1982 448Excerpta International Congress Series 558
Not in our library
613.
Vutuc C Kunze M Lungenkrebs bei Männern unter vierzig. Ergebnisse einer Fall-Kontroll-Studie über die Bedeutung des Tabakkonsums (Lung cancer in men under forty. Results of a controlled case study on the importance of tobacco consumption)Munchener Medizinische Wochenschrift1982 124101102
Not in our library
614.
Vutuc C Kunze M Lungenkregbs bei Angehörigen der Berufsgruppe 'Chauffeur'. (Incidence of lung cancer among 'chauffeurs')Offentl Gesundheitswes1982 442023
Not in our library
615.
Vutuc C Kunze M Lungenkrebs bei Angehörigen der Berufsgruppen 'Gummi- Farbstoff-Chemikalienerzeugung und -verarbeitung'. (Lung cancer among members of the occupational group processing rubber, dyes and chemicals)Offentl Gesundheitswes1982 44664666
Not in our library
616.
Vutuc C Bronchuskarzinom und Zigarettenkonsum bei Frauen (Ergebnisse einer Fall-Kontroll-Studie). Lung cancer and cigarette smoking in women (results of a case control study)Zentralblatt fur Bakteriologie Hygiene, I Abt Orig B1982 176329338
Not in our library
617.
Vutuc C Kunze M Tar yields of cigarettes and male lung cancer riskJ Natl Cancer Inst1983 71435437
Not in our library
618.
Vutuc C Lungenkrebsrisiko bei Angehörigen der Berufsgruppe 'Steinabbau und -verarbeitung'. (Lung cancer risk in workers belonging to occupation 'mining and processing of stone')Zentralblatt fur Bakteriologie Hygiene, I Abt Orig B1983 177183187
Not in our library
619.
Vutuc C Cancer risk relative to tar yield from cigarettesJournal of Smoking-Related Disorders1994 5Suppl 12527
Not in our library
620.
Kunze M Vutuc C Gori G, Bock FThreshold of tar exposure: analysis of smoking history of male lung cancer cases and controlsA safe cigarette? Proceedings of a meeting held at the Banbury Center, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y., Oct. 14–16, 19791980 Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory2936[Banbury Report 3.]
Not in our library
621.
Wakai K Ohno Y Genka K Ohmine K Kawamura T Tamakoshi A Aoki R Kojima M Lin Y Aoki K Smoking habits, local brand cigarettes and lung cancer risk in Okinawa, JapanJ Epidemiol1997 799105
Not in our library10.2188/jea.7.99
622.
Wald NJ Watt HC Prospective study of effect of switching from cigarettes to pipes or cigars on mortality from three smoking related diseasesBMJ1997 31418601863
Not in our library10.1136/bmj.314.7098.1860
623.
Wang S Hu Y Wu Y Li X Chi G Chen Y Dai W A comparative study of the risk factors for lung cancer in Guangdong, China. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 14Suppl 1S99S105
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90215-9
624.
Wang JS He DW Xia CL Su JM Wang GK Liu GF Guo X Han XY A case–control interview study on risk factors of lung cancer in the city of TaiyuanZhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi1985 6162165
Not in our library
625.
Wang XH He XZ, He DW, Xiao HPA case–control study of lung cancer risk factors in NanjingHealth effects and air pollution in 26 cities1984 Beijing, People's Republic of China: Ministry of Public Health1014
Not in our library
626.
Wang D Lan Q Tian L Yang R Liu Y He X Risk state analysis on lung cancer of male in Xuanwei, ChinaWei Sheng Yan Jiu1999 28208210
Not in our library
627.
Watson WL Conte AJ Lung cancer and smokingAm J Surg1955 89447456
Not in our library10.1016/0002-9610(55)90087-8
628.
Watson WL Conte AJ Smoking and lung cancerCancer1954 7245249
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(195403)7:2<245::aid-cncr2820070206>3.0.co;2-v
629.
Wicklund KG Daling JR Allard J Weiss NS Respiratory cancer among orchardists in Washington State, 1968 to 1980J Occup Med1988 30561564
Not in our library
630.
Wigle DT Mao Y Grace M Relative importance of smoking as a risk factor for selected cancersCan J Public Health1980 71269275
Not in our library
631.
Wilkinson P Hansell DM Janssens J Rubens M Rudd RM Taylor AN McDonald C Is lung cancer associated with asbestos exposure when there are no small opacities on the chest radiograph?Lancet1995 34510741078
Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(95)90817-x
632.
Wu AH Henderson BE Pike MC Yu MC Smoking and other risk factors for lung cancer in womenJ Natl Cancer Inst1985 74747751
Not in our library
633.
Wu AH Yu MC Thomas DC Pike MC Henderson BE Personal and family history of lung disease as risk factors for adenocarcinoma of the lungCancer Res1988 4872797284
Not in our library
634.
Wünsch-Filho V Moncau JE Mirabelli D Boffetta P Occupational risk factors of lung cancer in São Paulo, BrazilScand J Work Environ Health1998 24118124
Not in our library10.5271/sjweh.288
635.
Wünsch Filho V Magaldi C Nakao N Moncau JEC Trabalho industrial e câncer de pulmão. (Industrial work and lung cancer)Rev Saude Publica1995 29166176
Not in our library10.1590/s0034-89101995000300003
636.
Lung cancer among women in north-east China · 1990
No notice
637.
Xu Z-Y Blot WJ Xiao H-P Wu A Feng Y-P Stone BJ Sun J Ershow AG Henderson BE Fraumeni JF Jr Smoking, air pollution, and high rates of lung cancer in Shenyang, ChinaJ Natl Cancer Inst1989 8118001806
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/81.23.1800
638.
Xu ZY Blot WJ Li G Fraumeni JF Jr Zhao DZ Stone BJ Yin Q Wu A Henderson BE Guan BP O'Neill IK, Chen J, Bartsch HEnvironmental determinants of lung cancer in Shenyang, ChinaRelevance to human cancer of N-Nitroso compounds, tobacco smoke and mycotoxins1991 Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer460465IARC Scientific Publication No. 105
Not in our library
639.
Xu Z-Y Brown L Pan GW Li G Feng YP Guan DX Liu TF Liu LM Chao RM Sheng JH Lifestyle, environmental pollution and lung cancer in cities of Liaoning in northeastern China. International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer, Guangzhou, China, 12–16 December 1994Lung Cancer1996 141149160
Not in our library10.1016/s0169-5002(96)90220-2
640.
Blot WJ Xu ZY Boice JD Jr Zhao DZ Stone BJ Sun J Jing LB Fraumeni JF Jr Indoor radon and lung cancer in ChinaJ Natl Cancer Inst1990 8210251030
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/82.12.1025
641.
Wynder EL Mantel N Some epidemiological features of lung cancer among Jewish malesCancer1966 19191195
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(196602)19:2<191::aid-cncr2820190209>3.0.co;2-w
642.
Wynder E Payson Fairchild E Jr The role of history of persistent cough in the epidemiology of lung cancerAm Rev Respir Dis1966 94709720
Not in our library10.1164/arrd.1966.94.5.709
643.
Wynder EL Shigematsu T Environmental factors of cancer of the colon and rectumCancer1967 2015201561
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(196709)20:9<1520::aid-cncr2820200920>3.0.co;2-3
644.
Wynder EL Mabuchi K Lung cancer among cigar and pipe smokersPrev Med1972 2529542
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(72)90035-7
645.
Wynder EL Mabuchi K Beattie EJ Jr The epidemiology of lung cancer. Recent trendsJAMA1970 21322212228
Not in our library
646.
Wynder EL Tobacco as a cause of lung cancer, with special reference to the infrequency of lung cancer among non-smokersPennsylvania Medical Journal1954 5710731083
Not in our library
647.
Wynder EL Stellman SD Impact of long-term filter cigarette usage on lung and larynx cancer risk. A case–control studyJ Natl Cancer Inst1979 62471477
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/62.3.471
648.
Wynder EL Stellman SD Comparative epidemiology of tobacco-related cancersCancer Res1977 3746084622
Not in our library
649.
Harris RE Zang EA Anderson JI Wynder EL Race and sex differences in lung cancer risk associated with cigarette smokingInt J Epidemiol1993 23592599
Not in our library10.1093/ije/22.4.592
650.
Stellman SD Muscat JE Thompson S Hoffmann D Wynder EL Risk of squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the lung in relation to lifetime filter cigarette smokingCancer1997 80382388
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19970801)80:3<382::aid-cncr5>3.0.co;2-u
651.
Wynder EL Covey LS Mabuchi K Lung cancer in women: present and future trendsJ Natl Cancer Inst1973 51391401
Not in our library
652.
Hall NEL Wynder EL Diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer: a case–control studyEnviron Res1984 347786
Not in our library10.1016/0013-9351(84)90077-x
653.
Higgins IT Wynder EL Reduction in risk of lung cancer among ex-smokers with particular reference to histologic typeCancer1988 6223972401
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19881201)62:11<2397::aid-cncr2820621125>3.0.co;2-5
654.
Wynder EL Kabat GC The effect of low-yield cigarette smoking on lung cancer riskCancer1988 6212231230
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19880915)62:6<1223::aid-cncr2820620630>3.0.co;2-6
655.
Augustine A Harris RE Wynder EL Compensation as a risk factor to lung cancer in smokers who switch from nonfilter to filter cigarettesAm J Public Health1989 79188191
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.79.2.188
656.
Boffetta P Harris RE Wynder EL Diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer riskExp Pathol1989 373238
Not in our library10.1016/s0232-1513(89)80007-6
657.
Zang EA Wynder EL Cumulative tar exposure. A new index for estimating lung cancer risk among cigarette smokersCancer1992 706976
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19920701)70:1<69::aid-cncr2820700112>3.0.co;2-a
658.
Kabat GC Wynder EL Body mass index and lung cancer riskAm J Epidemiol1992 135769774
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116363
659.
Morabia A Wynder EL Cigarette smoking and lung cancer cell typesCancer1991 6820742078
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(19911101)68:9<2074::aid-cncr2820680939>3.0.co;2-x
660.
Morabia A Stellman SD Wynder EL Smoking prevalence in neighborhood and hospital controls: implications for hospital-based case–control studiesJ Clin Epidemiol1996 49885889
Not in our library10.1016/0895-4356(96)00026-1
661.
Zang EA Wynder EL Differences in lung cancer risk between men and women: examination of the evidenceJ Natl Cancer Inst1996 88183192
Not in our library10.1093/jnci/88.3-4.183
662.
Muscat JE Stellman SD Zhang Z-F Neugut AI Wynder EL Cigarette smoking and large cell carcinoma of the lungCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1997 6477480
Not in our library
663.
Stellman SD Muscat JE Hoffmann D Wynder EL Impact of filter cigarette smoking on lung cancer histologyPrev Med1997 26451456
Not in our library10.1006/pmed.1997.0212
664.
Muscat JE Stellman SD Richie JP Jr Wynder EL Lung cancer risk and workplace exposures in black men and womenEnviron Res1998 767884
Not in our library10.1006/enrs.1997.3787
665.
Muscat JE Stellman SD Wynder EL Insulation, asbestos, smoking habits, and lung cancer cell typesAm J Ind Med1995 27257269
Not in our library10.1002/ajim.4700270210
666.
Morabia A Stellman S Lumey LH Wynder EL Parakeets, canaries, finches, parrots and lung cancer: no associationBr J Cancer1998 77501504
Not in our library10.1038/bjc.1998.80
667.
Wynder EL Hoffmann D Less harmful ways of smokingJ Natl Cancer Inst1972 4817491758
Not in our library
668.
Wynder EL Etiology of lung cancer. Reflections on two decades of researchCancer1972 3013321339
Not in our library10.1002/1097-0142(197211)30:5<1332::aid-cncr2820300528>3.0.co;2-r
669.
Wynder EL Goodman MT Lung cancer and smoking: reflections and unresolved issuesLung cancer: causes and prevention. Proceedings of the International Lung Cancer Update Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 3–5, 19831984 Deerfield Beach, Florida: Verlag Chemie International, Inc313324
Not in our library
670.
Augustine A Harris RE Wynder EL Compensation as a risk factor for lung cancer in smokers who switch from nonfilter to filter cigarettesAdvances in cancer control: Innovations and research1988 Alan R Liss, Inc221230
Not in our library
671.
Boffetta P Harris RE Wynder EL Case–control study on occupational exposure to diesel exhaust and lung cancer riskAm J Ind Med1990 17577591
Not in our library10.1002/ajim.4700170504
672.
Kabat GC Morabia A Wynder EL Comparison of smoking habits of Blacks and Whites in a case–control studyAm J Public Health1991 8114831486
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.81.11.1483
673.
Kabat GC Aspects of the epidemiology of lung cancer in smokers and nonsmokers in the United StatesInternational symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancer. Dec 12–16 19941994 Guangzhou, People's Republic of China127Paper 2
Not in our library10.1016/0169-5002(95)00566-8
674.
Muscat JE Wynder EL Lung cancer pathology in smokers, ex-smokers and never smokersCancer Lett1995 8815
Not in our library10.1016/0304-3835(94)03608-l
675.
Kabat GC Aspects of the epidemiology of lung cancer in smokers and nonsmokers in the United StatesLung Cancer1996 15120
Not in our library10.1016/0169-5002(95)00566-8
676.
Higgins ITT Mahan CM Wynder EL Lung cancer among cigar and pipe smokersPrev Med1988 17116128
Not in our library10.1016/0091-7435(88)90077-1
677.
Kabat GC Hebert JR Use of mentholated cigarettes and lung cancer riskCancer Res1991 5165106513
Not in our library
678.
Wynder EL Navarrete A Arostegui GE Llambes JL Study of envirnomental factors in cancer of the respiratory tract in CubaJ Natl Cancer Inst1958 20665673
Not in our library
679.
Xiang-Zhen X Lubin JH Jun-Yao L Li-Fen Y Sheng LQ Lan Y Jian-Zhang W Blot WJ A cohort study in Southern China of tin miners exposed to radon and radon decay productsHealth Phys1993 64120131
Not in our library10.1097/00004032-199302000-00001
680.
Xu Z Brown LM Pan GW Liu TF Gao GS Stone BJ Cao RM Guan DX Sheng JH Yan ZS Cancer risks among iron and steel workers in Anshan, China, Part II: Case–control studies of lung and stomach cancerAm J Ind Med1996 30715
Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199607)30:1<7::aid-ajim2>3.0.co;2-#
681.
Xu RH Geng GY A case–control study on the relationship between lung cancer and smoking in Tianjin cityZhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi1983 4193197
Not in our library
682.
Xu XW Air pollution and residence mortality in 26 cities, China (1976–1981)1984 Beijing: Anti-epidemic Divn, Ministry of Public Health (PR China)440445
Not in our library
683.
Yamaguchi N Kido M Hoshuyama T Manabe H Kikuchi Y Nishio T Ohshima LHK Watanabe S A case–control study on occupational lung cancer risks in an industrialized city of JapanJpn J Cancer Res1992 83134140
Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb00077.x
684.
Yong L-C Brown CC Schatzkin A Dresser CM Slesinski MJ Cox CS Taylor PR Intake of vitamins E, C, and A and risk of lung cancer. The NHANES I Epidemiologic Followup StudyAm J Epidemiol1997 146231243
Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009258
685.
Yuan J-M Ross RK Wang X-L Gao Y-T Henderson BE Yu MC Morbidity and mortality in relation to cigarette smoking in Shanghai, China: a prospective male cohort studyJAMA1996 27516461650
Not in our library
686.
Zhang H Ho J Guan S Zhuang Y Jin G Liu X Yao T Chen G A study of the risk factors for primary lung cancerChung-Kuo Wei Sheng Tung Chi (Chinese Journal of Health Statistics)1990 72831
Not in our library
687.
Zheng W Gao YT Zhang R Deng J Sun L Liao M Yang Z Ling Z Zhao J Zhang Y Study on the relationship between smoking and lung squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinomaTumor1986 6172046-47
Not in our library
688.
Liu D A case–control study of 161 lung cancer cases in Beijing Thesis1987 Beijing Medical University, Beijing
Not in our library
689.
Zhou B He A Wang T The relationship between histologic types of lung cancer and cigarette smoking. In International symposium on lifestyle factors and human lung cancerDec 12–16 1994, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China1994 817
Not in our library
690.
Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJStatistics with confidence2000 2London: BMJ Books
Not in our library
691.
DerSimonian R Laird N Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControl Clin Trials1986 7177188
Not in our library10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
692.
SAS Institute IncThe GLM procedure. SAS/STAT user's guide (Online Documentation Version 8)Cary, N.Chttp://www.sfu.ca/sasdoc/sashtml/stat/chap30/index.htm
Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 5

Health effects associated with smoking: a Burden of Proof study · 2022
No notice
Environmental exposures during windows of susceptibility for breast cancer: a framework for prevention research · 2019
No notice
Smoking as a risk factor for lung cancer in women and men: a systematic review and meta-analysis · 2018
No notice
Quantification of the smoking-associated cancer risk with rate advancement periods: meta-analysis of individual participant data from cohorts of the CHANCES consortium · 2016
No notice
Gone to Pot â€“ A Review of the Association between Cannabis and Psychosis · 2014
No notice

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.