Does exposure to coal dust prevent or cause lung cancer?

Stayner, Leslie T.; Graber, Judith M.

doi:10.1136/oem.2009.048223

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Coalminers do not suffer from elevated lung cancer risks [ 78 , 79 ]. In the most recent study on US coalminers [ 80 ] the lung cancer standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was only slightly elevated (SMR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.00-1.18).…”

Section: Commentary On the Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translational toxicology in setting occupational exposure limits for dusts and hazard classification – a critical evaluation of a recent approach to translate dust overload findings from rats to humans

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWe analyze the scientific basis and methodology used by the German MAK Commission in their recommendations for exposure limits and carcinogen classification of “granular biopersistent particles without known specific toxicity” (GBS). These recommendations are under review at the European Union level. We examine the scientific assumptions in an attempt to reproduce the results. MAK’s human equivalent concentrations (HECs) are based on a particle mass and on a volumetric model in which results from rat inhalation studies are translated to derive occupational exposure limits (OELs) and a carcinogen classification.MethodsWe followed the methods as proposed by the MAK Commission and Pauluhn 2011. We also examined key assumptions in the metrics, such as surface area of the human lung, deposition fractions of inhaled dusts, human clearance rates; and risk of lung cancer among workers, presumed to have some potential for lung overload, the physiological condition in rats associated with an increase in lung cancer risk.ResultsThe MAK recommendations on exposure limits for GBS have numerous incorrect assumptions that adversely affect the final results. The procedures to derive the respirable occupational exposure limit (OEL) could not be reproduced, a finding raising considerable scientific uncertainty about the reliability of the recommendations. Moreover, the scientific basis of using the rat model is confounded by the fact that rats and humans show different cellular responses to inhaled particles as demonstrated by bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) studies in both species.ConclusionClassifying all GBS as carcinogenic to humans based on rat inhalation studies in which lung overload leads to chronic inflammation and cancer is inappropriate. Studies of workers, who have been exposed to relevant levels of dust, have not indicated an increase in lung cancer risk. Using the methods proposed by the MAK, we were unable to reproduce the OEL for GBS recommended by the Commission, but identified substantial errors in the models. Considerable shortcomings in the use of lung surface area, clearance rates, deposition fractions; as well as using the mass and volumetric metrics as opposed to the particle surface area metric limit the scientific reliability of the proposed GBS OEL and carcinogen classification.

show abstract

Section: Commentary On the Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translational toxicology in setting occupational exposure limits for dusts and hazard classification – a critical evaluation of a recent approach to translate dust overload findings from rats to humans

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One Expert cited a recent study on coal dust exposed workers as supporting lung cancer occurrence in coal workers exposed to high dust levels (Taeger et al 2015). Several Experts strongly disagreed with the quality and interpretation of this study, citing several recent studies that found no association between coal dust exposure and lung cancer (Attfield and Kuempel 2008;Miller and MacCalman 2010;Stayner and Graber 2011;Morfeld 2013;Morfeld et al 2015).…”

Section: Is the Rat Lung Cancer Response To Pslts Unique From Other Rmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, one expert was of the opinion, based on the study of Taeger et al (2015), that elevated lung cancer risk in coal miners cannot be ruled out. As stated previously, several experts strongly disagreed with the quality and interpretation of the Taeger et al (2015) study and cited several studies in support of their position including: IARC (1997), Attfield and Kuempel (2008), Miller and MacCalman (2010), Stayner and Graber (2011), Morfeld (2013), and Morfeld et al (2015).…”

Section: Is the Rat Lung Cancer Response To Pslts Unique From Other Rmentioning

confidence: 97%

Expert workshop on the hazards and risks of poorly soluble low toxicity particles

Driscoll

Borm

2020

Inhalation Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lung particle overload' refers to the impaired lung particle clearance and increased particle retention occurring with high lung doses of poorly soluble low toxicity (PSLT) particles. In rats, lung particle overload is associated with inflammation, epithelial hyperplasia, and, in extreme cases, lung cancer. While the human relevance of rat lung tumors occurring under overload has been questioned, recent regulatory decisions have considered these outcomes evidence of possible human hazard. To better understand the state-of-the-science on PSLT toxicology, an Expert Workshop was held to document agreements and differences amongst a panel of highly experienced scientists and regulators. Key outcomes included: a functional definition of PSLTs; agreement the rat is a sensitive model for PSLT inhalation toxicology; identifying lung inflammation as a critical endpoint for PSLT risk assessment; and, agreement rat lung cancer occurring only under conditions of lung particle overload does not imply a cancer hazard for humans under non-overloading exposures. Moreover, when askedshould PSLTs be considered as human lung carcinogens based on rat data alone (and no supporting data from other species), the expert consensus was: 'No. However, the experts noted the current default regulatory position on rat lung overload data alone would be the suspicion of human carcinogen hazard.' The many areas of the expert agreement provide guidance for design, interpretation, and extrapolating PSLT inhalation toxicology studies. Considering the workshop outcomes, the authors recommend guidelines for evaluation and classification of PSLT be reassessed; and, prior decisions on PSLT hazard classification be revisited to determine if they remain appropriate. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…It has long been known [42] that underground coal miners are less prone to lung cancer than the general population. These surprising statistics have been corrected for age and smoking.…”

Section: Appendix Iii: Can We Find a Cure For Lung Cancer Using Our Ownmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, coal miners are more prone to other forms of coal-caused lung disease such as pneumoconiosis (black lung disease) involving tissue scarring (pulmonary fibrosis), inflammation and accumulation of macrophage cells in the lower lung found to be charged with an excess of coal dust particles which the macrophages are attempting to destroy. This curious statistical fact remains mysterious to this day and is of sufficient interest for inclusion in a more recent medical journal editorial [42].…”

Section: Appendix Iii: Can We Find a Cure For Lung Cancer Using Our Ownmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of public participation in monitoring risks in large-scale industrial projects: An Australian experience

Boothroyd¹

2017

Int. J. SAFE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does exposure to coal dust prevent or cause lung cancer?

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

Translational toxicology in setting occupational exposure limits for dusts and hazard classification – a critical evaluation of a recent approach to translate dust overload findings from rats to humans

Translational toxicology in setting occupational exposure limits for dusts and hazard classification – a critical evaluation of a recent approach to translate dust overload findings from rats to humans

Expert workshop on the hazards and risks of poorly soluble low toxicity particles

The importance of public participation in monitoring risks in large-scale industrial projects: An Australian experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About