Table 3.
Trend test at different exposure level in all groups.
| CED (mg/m3) | Total
|
Male
|
Female
|
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Damage | Normal | % | Damage | Normal | % | Damage | Normal | % | |
| 0~ | 23 | 219 | 9.5 | 17 | 149 | 10.2 | 6 | 70 | 7.9 |
| 0.48~ | 11 | 60 | 15.5 | 10 | 54 | 15.6 | 1 | 6 | 14.3 |
| 1.13~ | 19 | 68 | 21.8 | 10 | 46 | 17.9 | 9 | 22 | 29.0 |
| 6.36~ | 29 | 54 | 34.9 | 29 | 54 | 34.9 | 0 | 0 | – |
| Linear trend | |||||||||
| X2 | 29.12 | 20.91 | 7.99 | ||||||
| P | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.005 | ||||||
Micronucleus damage was defined as micronucleus frequency ≥5‰. %: damage case frequency in each group; CED, cumulative exposure dose, VCM exposed subjects were divided into four groups with quarte cumulative doses.