1982
DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(82)92153-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Malignant Melanoma Incidence at the Los Alamos National Laboratory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1986
1986
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Excess skin cancer mortality has been noted for radiologists [Metanoski et al, 1975] and for employees of a nuclear fuels fabricating plant [Hadjimichael et al, 1983]. Conversely, in an analyses of data from existing records and using a slightly different study design, Acquavella et al [1982] found no overall excess of malignant melanoma among employees at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Excess skin cancer mortality has been noted for radiologists [Metanoski et al, 1975] and for employees of a nuclear fuels fabricating plant [Hadjimichael et al, 1983]. Conversely, in an analyses of data from existing records and using a slightly different study design, Acquavella et al [1982] found no overall excess of malignant melanoma among employees at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors of that study describe matches on several exposure related variables, which may have influenced their results. From the radiation laboratory at Los Alamos, which had similar activities as LLNL, an incidence study based on six cases 27 and a case-control study with 15 male and 5 female cases 28 have been published. These studies 27 28 have not found a clear association between radiation and the risk of malignant melanoma.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This factor was not significant in the in situ case-control pairs. When consideration was restricted to LLNL employment, 18 cases had higher scores for the Nevada Test Site than their matched controls. This was compared to nine pairs where the confrol had a higher score.…”
Section: Occupational Interview Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%