Characterization of a French series of female cases of mesothelioma

Abstract

These results will allow hypotheses to be generated about associations between mesothelioma and non-occupational asbestos exposure, X-ray exposure and history of respiratory disease.

Epidemiology of Environmental Exposure and Malignant Mesothelioma

“…52 Studies utilizing national population databases relied on samples that were representative of the general population for a particular country or region, including both men and women (see Table 1). There are a few studies focusing on a particular population; one study focused exclusively on women, 43 one on familial MM cases, and one on those who were exposed to asbestos during childhood. 39 In addition, in a recent study of the population in Western Australia, an area with extensive research on MM related to crocidolite asbestos, Franklin et al 40 compared MM burden between non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal individuals, who comprise an understudied group.…”

“…The literature classification of nonoccupational exposure to asbestos is very heterogeneous. For the purpose of this review, all nonoccupational asbestos exposure was classified as EE and further grouped into the following four categories: (1) exposure to NOA in areas where studies of the geological structure have shown the presence of asbestos but asbestos-related industries are absent; (2) neighborhood exposure based on residence in close proximity to industrial/ mining sources of asbestos; (3) household exposure for family members of occupationally exposed subjects, which includes what some authors call familial exposure 19,25 and what Camiade et al 43 and Mensi et al 28 called paraoccupational exposure, referring to those who live with an asbestos worker and those who clean asbestos-contaminated clothes; and (4) other nonoccupational exposures, which includes homerelated 28 or domestic exposure 24,41,54 (for example, Figure 2. Relative quality expressed as z scores (y axis) of the studies reviewed (x axis, in the same order as they appear in Table 1).…”

“…For example, some studies referred to any nonoccupational exposure, 53 whereas others referred to nonoccupational exposure as any type of exposure other than those occurring in domestic, household, or neighborhood situations. 19,21,25,27,28 Camiade et al 43 classified EE as the exposure occurring while living in a town where asbestos-processing plants were located, whereas domestic exposure occurring in women who washed clothes of occupationally exposed family members was considered part of the occupational exposure by Bianchi and Bianchi. 18 Another aspect to consider is that different exposure categories tend to overlap.…”

“…The results suggest that the cases with no IAE were likely associated with neighborhood and domestic EEs. The study by Camiade et al 43 used a hybrid clustering analysis of exposure, demographics, and diagnostic variables in 318 French cases in which MM was diagnosed in female patients between 1998 and 2009; it was found that more than half of the subjects (59.4%) were clustered together and most of the cases within these clusters had no known asbestos exposure (e.g., no occupational, paraoccupational, environmental, or nonoccupational exposures to asbestos). These results suggest that there is a large proportion of cases, mostly involving women, for which a clear exposure to asbestos cannot be identified with the commonly used epidemiologic instruments, such as questionnaires.…”

Five years update on relationships between malignant pleural mesothelioma and exposure to asbestos and other elongated mineral particles

“…When considering the entire dataset, for subjects occupationally 25 exposed only to asbestos between 1 to 10 fibers/ml.yrs, the OR was 3.7 [95% CI: 2.4-5.6] 26 compared to subjects not exposed to asbestos, mineral wool and silica. However, it increased to 27 additionally exposed to mineral wool, silica or to the three mineral particles respectively 29 (Lacourt et al 2013). When restricting the dataset to subjects ever exposed to asbestos (988 cases 30 and 1,125 controls), the OR for subjects occupationally exposed only to asbestos at 50 fibers/ml-31 yrs was 1.9 [95% CI: 1.4-2.5] and was 12.8 [95% CI: 4.7-35.1] when subjects were additionally 1 exposed to refractory ceramic fibers (Lacourt et al 2014).…”