Non-Asbestos-related Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Kanbay, Asiye; Şimşek, Zuhal; Tutar, Nuri; Yılmaz, İnsu; Büyükoğlan, Hakan; Canöz, Özlem; Demir, Ramazan

doi:10.2169/internalmedicine.53.0900

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the weight of evidence demonstrates that there are other causes and risk factors for mesothelioma, including age (La Vecchia et al 2000;Clements et al 2007;Cree et al 2009;Moolgavkar et al 2009;Girardi et al 2014;Schonfeld et al 2014;Mensi et al 2016), erionite exposure (Maltoni et al 1982;Poole et al 1983;Johnson et al 1984;Wagner et al 1985;Carthew et al 1992;Fraire et al 1997;Baumann and Carbone 2016;Attanoos et al 2018;Korchevskiy et al 2019), genetic predisposition (Wassermann et al 1980;Brenner et al 1981;Fraire et al 1988;Huncharek 2002;Kayatta et al 2013;Kanbay et al 2014;Attanoos et al 2018), and therapeutic ionizing radiation (van Kaick et al 1999;Travis et al 2003;Travis et al 2005;Tward et al 2006;Deutsch et al 2007;Hodgson et al 2007;Teta et al 2007;De Bruin et al 2009;Goodman et al 2009;Berrington de Gonzalez et al 2010;Farioli et al 2013;Gibb et al 2013;Schaapveld et al 2015;Schubauer-Berigan et al 2015;Chang et al 2017) and McDonald 1980;…”

Section: Comment By Drs Roggli and Sporn (Dukementioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review of the 2020 EPA risk assessment for chrysotile and its many shortcomings

Paustenbach

Brew

Ligas

et al. 2021

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From 2018 to 2020, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) performed a risk evaluation of chrysotile asbestos to evaluate the hazards of asbestos-containing products (e.g. encapsulated products), including brakes and gaskets, allegedly currently sold in the United States. During the public review period, the EPA received more than 100 letters commenting on the proposed risk evaluation. The Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC), which peer reviewed the document, asked approximately 100 questions of the EPA that they expected to be addressed prior to publication of the final version of the risk assessment on 30 December 2020. After careful analysis, the authors of this manuscript found many significant scientific shortcomings in both the EPA's draft and final versions of the chrysotile risk evaluation. First, the EPA provided insufficient evidence regarding the current number of chrysotile-containing brakes and gaskets being sold in the United States, which influences the need for regulatory oversight. Second, the Agency did not give adequate consideration to the more than 200 air samples detailed in the published literature of auto mechanics who changed brakes in the 1970-1989 era. Third, the Agency did not consider more than 15 epidemiology studies indicating that exposures to encapsulated chrysotile asbestos in brakes and gaskets, which were generally in commerce from approximately 1950-1985, did not increase the incidence of any asbestos-related disease. Fourth, the concern about chrysotile asbestos being a mesothelioma hazard was based on populations in two facilities where mixed exposure to chrysotile and commercial amphibole asbestos (amosite and crocidolite) occurred. All 8 cases of pleural cancer and mesothelioma in the examined populations arose in facilities where amphiboles were present. It was therefore inappropriate to rely on these cohorts to predict the health risks of exposure to short fiber chrysotile, especially of those fibers filled with phenolic resins. Fifth, the suggested inhalation unit risk (IUR) for chrysotile asbestos was far too high since it was not markedly different than for amosite, despite the fact that the amphiboles are a far more potent carcinogen. Sixth, the approach to low dose modeling was not the most appropriate one in several respects, but, without question, it should have accounted for the background rate of mesothelioma in the general population. Just one month after this assessment was published, the National Academies of Science notified the EPA that the Agency's systematic review process was flawed. The result of the EPA's chrysotile asbestos risk evaluation is that society can expect dozens of years of scientifically unwarranted litigation. Due to an aging population and because some fraction of the population is naturally predisposed to mesothelioma given the presence of various genetic mutations in DNA repair mechanisms (e.g. BAP1 and others), the vast majority of mesotheliomas in the post-2035 era are expected to be spontaneous and unrelat...

show abstract

Section: Comment By Drs Roggli and Sporn (Dukementioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review of the 2020 EPA risk assessment for chrysotile and its many shortcomings

Paustenbach

Brew

Ligas

et al. 2021

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Potential cofactors for the development of MM are also exposure to other elongated mineral particles (EMPs) such as synthetic materials (ceramics, nanoparticles), ionizing radiation, and SV-40 virus infections [34,35]. Genetic factors can also play a role in the onset of MM.…”

Section: Malignant Mesothelioma (Mm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology of Mesothelioma

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 1973 the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified asbestos as a certain carcinogen, but today it is still used in several countries. To date, mesothelioma risk is certainly linked not only to occupational exposures but also to environmental exposures. The incidence and mortality are increasing worldwide, especially in developing countries where asbestos is still often used without adequate measures for worker safety. The epidemiological surveillance systems of related asbestos diseases are instruments of public health adopted internationally. The experience and the operating methodology of the Italian mesothelioma registry and the data produced from 1996 to 2015 highlight how in countries where the asbestos ban has been active for over 20 years the risk of asbestos remains present, especially in the construction sector as well as for the environmental exposures of the resident population near companies that used asbestos in their production cycle. Worldwide, it is necessary to introduce the ban on the extraction, processing, and marketing of asbestos as claimed by the international scientific community.

show abstract

“…By contrast, the incidence of mesothelioma without asbestos contact is extremely low (<1: 1 million). Other potential cofactors for the development of mesothelioma besides asbestos are synthetic materials (ceramics, nanoparticles), ionizing radiation, and SV-40 virus infections [ 11 ].…”

Section: Epidemiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of malignant pleural mesothelioma – part 1: epidemiology, diagnosis, and staging

Geltner

Errhalt

Baumgartner³

et al. 2016

Wien Klin Wochenschr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryMalignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare malignant disease that in the majority of cases is associated with asbestos exposure. The incidence in Europe is about 20 per million inhabitants and it is increasing worldwide. Initial symptoms are shortness of breath, pleural effusion, cough, and chest pain. The typical growth pattern is along the pleural surface; however, infiltration of the lung and/or mediastinal and chest wall structures can occur in a more advanced stage. Ultimately, distant metastases outside the chest can result. Several histological subtypes of pleural mesothelioma exist, which must be differentiated from either benign diseases or metastases in the pleural space by other tumor entities. This differential diagnosis can be very difficult and a large panel of immunohistochemical markers is required to establish the exact diagnosis. The standard procedure for confirming the disease and obtaining sufficient tissue for the diagnosis is videothoracoscopy. Full thickness biopsies are required, while transthoracic needle puncture of pleural fluid or tissue is considered to be insufficient for a cytological diagnosis. Complete and detailed staging is mandatory for categorization of the disease as well as for therapeutic decision making.

show abstract

Non-Asbestos-related Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Cited by 5 publications

References 11 publications

A critical review of the 2020 EPA risk assessment for chrysotile and its many shortcomings

A critical review of the 2020 EPA risk assessment for chrysotile and its many shortcomings

Epidemiology of Mesothelioma

Management of malignant pleural mesothelioma – part 1: epidemiology, diagnosis, and staging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About