1998
DOI: 10.1006/taap.1998.8522
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Importance of Fiber Biopersistence and Lung Dose in Determining the Chronic Inhalation Effects of X607, RCF1, and Chrysotile Asbestos in Rats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
29
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
3
29
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The mean length of the long crocidolite was 5.4 µm, and the mean length of short one was 1.2 µm. Since O 2 -is also related to H 2 O 2 generation, our result that ability to induce CL was similar with under 17) . Previous study demonstrated that the calculated fiber number >5 µm in length required for inducing a 25% tumour risk differed between various fiber samples depending on fiber size and durability 5) .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…The mean length of the long crocidolite was 5.4 µm, and the mean length of short one was 1.2 µm. Since O 2 -is also related to H 2 O 2 generation, our result that ability to induce CL was similar with under 17) . Previous study demonstrated that the calculated fiber number >5 µm in length required for inducing a 25% tumour risk differed between various fiber samples depending on fiber size and durability 5) .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…A number of authors (e.g., Bernstein et al, 1996;Hadley, 1995, 1996;Hesterberg et al, 1998aHesterberg et al, , 1998b indicate that a correlation exists between a fiber's biodurability and its bioactivity (including carcinogenicity) and that the biodurability of a fiber is inversely related to its dissolution rate in biological fluids. However, many studies of this issue suffer from certain methodological limitations that limit their utility for quantitatively distinguishing among the effects of differing asbestos mineral types (Berman and Crump, 2003, Section 6.2.4).…”
Section: Biodurabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…see Wagner and Skidmore, 1965;Davis et al, 1978;Davis, 1989;Case et al, 1997;McDonald et al, 1997;McDonald, 1998). The conclusion that less biopersistent fibres are less hazardous has also been demonstrated for a number of man-made vitreous fibres in studies by Hesterberg et al (1998) and Miller et al (1999) for example, and is reflected in the findings of an IARC Working Party (IARC, 2002) and the conclusions of Hesterberg et al (2012) on the safe manufacture and use of glass fibre. The central role of biopersistence in fibre toxicology is also supported by more recent studies on a polymer (Donaldson, 2009) and carbon nanotubes (Donaldson et al, 2010), for example.…”
Section: Principles Of Fibre Toxicity and The Key Role Of Biopersistencementioning
confidence: 78%