Asbestos bodies in lung tissue following exposure to crocidolite

Asbestos exposure and gestational trophoblastic disease: a hypothesis

Among 2,968 women and girls exposed to crocidolite (blue asbestos) at Wittenoom, three cases of choriocarcinoma and three cases of hydatidiform mole have been identified (crude incidence rate of 9.9 per 1000 women and 1.7 per 1000 deliveries for choriocarcinoma and hydatidiform mole, respectively). The women with choriocarcinoma were resident at Wittenoom at the time of disease development, whereas hydatidiform mole occurred much later in women who had first been exposed to asbestos as young girls. Four of the six cases were known to have lived with asbestos company workers who brought their dusty work-clothes home for washing. Asbestos fibers have been reported in the lung, the pleural and peritoneal mesothelium, and the human ovary. They have also been detected in placental digests of live and stillborn infants. This cluster of gestational trophoblastic diseases has some biological plausibility for asbestos causation. Taking an occupational and residential history and examining pathologic specimens for asbestos fibers or bodies may prove useful in patients with gestational trophoblastic disease.

The additional risk of malignant mesothelioma in former workers and residents of Wittenoom with benign pleural disease or asbestosis

AIMS

To examine the hypothesis that people with benign pleural disease or asbestosis have an increased risk of malignant mesothelioma beyond that attributable to their degree of asbestos exposure.

METHODS

Former workers and residents of the crocidolite mining and milling town of Wittenoom are participating in a cancer prevention programme (n = 1988). The first plain chest radiograph taken at the time of recruitment into the cancer prevention programme was read for evidence of benign pleural disease and asbestosis, using the UICC classification. Crocidolite exposure of former workers was derived from employment records and records of dust measurements performed during the operation of the asbestos mine and mill between 1943 and 1966. Based on fibre counts, exposure for former residents was determined using duration of residence and period of residence (before and after a new mill was commissioned in 1957) and interpolation from periodic hygienic measures undertaken from personal monitors between 1966 and 1992. Cox proportional hazards modelling was used to relate benign pleural disease, asbestosis, asbestos exposure, and mesothelioma.

RESULTS

Between 1990 and 2002, there were 76 cases of mesothelioma (56 of the pleura and 20 of the peritoneum). Cases had more radiographic evidence of (all) benign pleural disease, pleural thickening, blunt/obliterated costophrenic angle, and asbestosis than non-cases. Adjusting for time since first exposure (log years), cumulative exposure (log f/ml-years), and age at the start of the programme, pleural thickening (OR = 3.1, 95% CI 1.2 to 7.6) and asbestosis (OR = 3.3, 95% CI 1.3 to 8.6) were associated with an increased risk of peritoneal mesothelioma. There was no increased risk for pleural mesothelioma.

CONCLUSION

The presence of benign pleural disease, in particular pleural thickening, and asbestosis appears to increase the risk of mesothelioma of the peritoneum, but not of the pleura beyond that attributable to indices of asbestos exposure in this cohort of subjects exposed to crocidolite.

After Helsinki: a multidisciplinary review of the relationship between asbestos exposure and lung cancer, with emphasis on studies published during 1997-2004

Despite an extensive literature, the relationship between asbestos exposure and lung cancer remains the subject of controversy, related to the fact that most asbestos-associated lung cancers occur in those who are also cigarette smokers: because smoking represents the strongest identifiable lung cancer risk factor among many others, and lung cancer is not uncommon across industrialised societies, analysis of the combined (synergistic) effects of smoking and asbestos on lung cancer risk is a more complex exercise than the relationship between asbestos inhalation and mesothelioma. As a follow-on from previous reviews of prevailing evidence, this review critically evaluates more recent studies on this relationship--concentrating on those published between 1997 and 2004--including lung cancer to mesothelioma ratios, the interactive effects of cigarette smoke and asbestos in combination, and the cumulative exposure model for lung cancer induction as set forth in The Helsinki Criteria and The AWARD Criteria (as opposed to the asbestosis-->cancer model), together with discussion of differential genetic susceptibility/resistance factors for lung carcinogenesis by both cigarette smoke and asbestos. The authors conclude that: (i) the prevailing evidence strongly supports the cumulative exposure model; (ii) the criteria for probabilistic attribution of lung cancer to mixed asbestos exposures as a consequence of the production and end-use of asbestos-containing products such as insulation and asbestos-cement building materials--as embodied in The Helsinki and AWARD Criteria--conform to, and are further consolidated by, the new evidence discussed in this review; (iii) different attribution criteria (e.g., greater cumulative exposures) are appropriate for chrysotile mining/milling and perhaps for other chrysotile-only exposures, such as friction products manufacture, than for amphibole-only exposures or mixed asbestos exposures; and (iv) emerging evidence on genetic susceptibility/resistance factors for lung cancer risk as a consequence of cigarette smoking, and potentially also asbestos exposure, suggests that genotypic variation may represent an additional confounding factor potentially affecting the strength of association and hence the probability of causal contribution in the individual subject, but at present there is insufficient evidence to draw any meaningful conclusions concerning variation in asbestos-mediated lung cancer risk relative to such resistance/susceptibility factors.