Mesothelioma incidence varies markedly from one country to another. The highest annual crude incidence rates (about 30 cases per million) are observed in Australia, Belgium, and Great Britain. A lot of data indicate a relationship between mesothelioma and asbestos. The hot areas for mesothelioma exactly correspond to the sites of industries with high asbestos use, such as shipbuilding and asbestos-cement industry. However, in many countries with high asbestos consumption, mesothelioma incidence is low. The reasons for this fact are not clear. The latency periods elapsing between first exposure to asbestos and development of mesothelioma are mostly longer than 40 yr. An inverse relationship exists between intensity of asbestos exposure and length of the latency period. Mesothelioma generally develops after long-time exposures to asbestos. Some recent studies show that the risk increases with the duration of exposure. Possible co-factors in the pathogenesis of asbestos-related mesothelioma include genetic predisposition, diets poor in fruit and vegetables, viruses, immune impairment, recurrent serosal inflammation. The study of co-morbidity in mesothelioma could give an insight into the pathogenesis of the tumor. While a levelling-off in mesothelioma incidence has been registered in some countries, a worsening of the epidemic is predictable in large parts of the world.

The potential impact of biofilm on healing in acute and chronic wounds is one of the most controversial current issues in wound care. A significant amount of laboratory-based research has been carried out on this topic, however, in 2013 the European Wound Management Association (EWMA) pointed out the lack of guidance for managing biofilms in clinical practice and solicited the need for guidelines and further clinical research. In response to this challenge, the Italian Nursing Wound Healing Society (AISLeC) initiated a project which aimed to achieve consensus among a multidisciplinary and multiprofessional international panel of experts to identify what could be considered part of 'good clinical practice' with respect to the recognition and management of biofilms in acute and chronic wounds. The group followed a systematic approach, developed by the GRADE working group, to define relevant questions and clinical recommendations raised in clinical practice. An independent librarian retrieved and screened approximately 2000 pertinent published papers to produce tables of levels of evidence. After a smaller focus group had a multistep structured discussion, and a formal voting process had been completed, ten therapeutic interventions were identified as being strongly recommendable for clinical practice, while another four recommendations were graded as being 'weak'. The panel subsequently formulated a preliminary statement (although with a weak grade of agreement): 'provided that other causes that prevent optimal wound healing have been ruled out, chronic wounds are chronically infected'. All members of the panel agreed that there is a paucity of reliable, well-conducted clinical trials which have produced clear evidence related to the effects of biofilm presence. In the meantime it was agreed that expert-based guidelines were needed to be developed for the recognition and management of biofilms in wounds and for the best design of future clinical trials. This is a fundamental and urgent task for both laboratory-based scientists and clinicians.

No abstract

Background:Mesothelioma incidence has taken epidemic proportions in various countries. The trend of the epidemic remains undefined.Objective:To collect the most recent available data on mesothelioma incidence in order to determine the present trend of the epidemic.Materials and Methods:Data of the Cancer and Mesothelioma Registries have been reviewed. In addition, numerous researchers were contacted to obtain supplementary information.Results:The highest incidence rates are reported from some countries in Europe (United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Malta, Belgium), and in Oceania (Australia, New Zealand). Relatively low incidence/mortality rates are reported from Japan and from Central Europe. In many countries a trend to increase continues to be observed. Data are not available for the mostly populous countries.Conclusion:Mesothelioma epidemic does not show signs of attenuation. The lack of data for a large majority of the world does not allow that the consciousness of the risks related to asbestos exposure is reached.

A series of 557 malignant mesotheliomas of the pleura diagnosed in the Trieste-Monfalcone area, Italy, in the period 1968-2000 were reviewed. The series included 492 men and 65 women, aged between 32 and 93 years (median age 69 years). Necropsy findings were available in 456 cases (82%). Occupational histories were obtained from the patients themselves or from their relatives by personal or telephone interviews. Routine lung sections were examined for asbestos bodies in 442 cases. In 109 cases isolation and counting of asbestos bodies were performed. A majority of people had histories of working in the shipyards. Asbestos bodies were observed in lung sections in 67% of the cases. Lung asbestos body burdens after isolation ranged between 20 bodies and about 10 millions of bodies/g dried tissue. Latency periods (time intervals between first exposure to asbestos and death) ranged between 14 and 75 years (mean 48.8 years, median 51.0). Latency periods among insulators and dock workers were shorter than among the other categories. High asbestos consumption occurred in many countries in the 1960s and in the 1970s. The data on latency periods obtained in the present study suggest that a world mesothelioma epidemic has to be expected in the coming decades.