41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Domestic Asbestos Exposure: A Review of Epidemiologic and Exposure Data

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Inhalation of asbestos resulting from living with and handling the clothing of workers directly exposed to asbestos has been established as a possible contributor to disease. This review evaluates epidemiologic studies of asbestos-related disease or conditions (mesothelioma, lung cancer, and pleural and interstitial abnormalities) among domestically exposed individuals and exposure studies that provide either direct exposure measurements or surrogate measures of asbestos exposure. A meta-analysis of studies providing relative risk estimates (n = 12) of mesothelioma was performed, resulting in a summary relative risk estimate (SRRE) of 5.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.48–10.13). This SRRE pertains to persons domestically exposed via workers involved in occupations with a traditionally high risk of disease from exposure to asbestos ( i.e., asbestos product manufacturing workers, insulators, shipyard workers, and asbestos miners). The epidemiologic studies also show an elevated risk of interstitial, but more likely pleural, abnormalities (n = 6), though only half accounted for confounding exposures. The studies are limited with regard to lung cancer (n = 2). Several exposure-related studies describe results from airborne samples collected within the home (n = 3), during laundering of contaminated clothing (n = 1) or in controlled exposure simulations (n = 5) of domestic exposures, the latter of which were generally associated with low-level chrysotile-exposed workers. Lung burden studies (n = 6) were also evaluated as a surrogate of exposure. In general, available results for domestic exposures are lower than the workers’ exposures. Recent simulations of low-level chrysotile-exposed workers indicate asbestos levels commensurate with background concentrations in those exposed domestically.

          Related collections

          Most cited references124

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The quantitative risks of mesothelioma and lung cancer in relation to asbestos exposure.

          Mortality reports on asbestos exposed cohorts which gave information on exposure levels from which (as a minimum) a cohort average cumulative exposure could be estimated were reviewed. At exposure levels seen in occupational cohorts it is concluded that the exposure specific risk of mesothelioma from the three principal commercial asbestos types is broadly in the ratio 1:100:500 for chrysotile, amosite and crocidolite respectively. For lung cancer the conclusions are less clear cut. Cohorts exposed only to crocidolite or amosite record similar exposure specific risk levels (around 5% excess lung cancer per f/ml.yr); but chrysotile exposed cohorts show a less consistent picture, with a clear discrepancy between the mortality experience of a cohort of xhrysotile textile workers in Carolina and the Quebec miners cohort. Taking account of the excess risk recorded by cohorts with mixed fibre exposures (generally<1%), the Carolina experience looks uptypically high. It is suggested that a best estimate lung cancer risk for chrysotile alone would be 0.1%, with a highest reasonable estimate of 0.5%. The risk differential between chrysotile and the two amphibole fibres for lunc cancer is thus between 1:10 and 1:50. Examination of the inter-study dose response relationship for the amphibole fibres suggests a non-linear relationship for all three cancer endpoints (pleural and peritoneal mesotheliomas, and lung cancer). The peritoneal mesothelioma risk is proportional to the square of cumulative exposure, lung cancer risk lies between a linear and square relationship and pleural mesothelioma seems to rise less than linearly with cumulative dose. Although these non-linear relationships provide a best fit ot the data, statistical and other uncertainties mean that a linear relationship remains arguable for pleural and lung tumours (but not or peritoneal tumours). Based on these considerations, and a discussion fo the associated uncertainties, a series of quantified risk summary statements for different elvels of cumulative exposure are presented.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnosis and initial management of nonmalignant diseases related to asbestos.

            (2004)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Occupational, domestic and environmental mesothelioma risks in the British population: a case–control study

              We obtained lifetime occupational and residential histories by telephone interview with 622 mesothelioma patients (512 men, 110 women) and 1420 population controls. Odds ratios (ORs) were converted to lifetime risk (LR) estimates for Britons born in the 1940s. Male ORs (95% confidence interval (CI)) relative to low-risk occupations for >10 years of exposure before the age of 30 years were 50.0 (25.8–96.8) for carpenters (LR 1 in 17), 17.1 (10.3–28.3) for plumbers, electricians and painters, 7.0 (3.2–15.2) for other construction workers, 15.3 (9.0–26.2) for other recognised high-risk occupations and 5.2 (3.1–8.5) in other industries where asbestos may be encountered. The LR was similar in apparently unexposed men and women (∼1 in 1000), and this was approximately doubled in exposed workers' relatives (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3–3.2). No other environmental hazards were identified. In all, 14% of male and 62% of female cases were not attributable to occupational or domestic asbestos exposure. Approximately half of the male cases were construction workers, and only four had worked for more than 5 years in asbestos product manufacture.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                31 October 2013
                November 2013
                : 10
                : 11
                : 5629-5670
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Exponent, 475 14th Street, Suite 400, Oakland, CA 94612, USA; E-Mail: cravenv@ 123456exponent.com
                [2 ]New Era Sciences, LLC, Issaquah, WA 98027, USA; E-Mail: dldahlstrom@ 123456nes2013.com
                [3 ]Exponent, 2595 Canyon Boulevard, Suite 440, Boulder, CO 80303, USA; E-Mail: dalexander@ 123456exponent.com
                [4 ]Exponent, 149 Commonwealth Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA; E-Mail: fmowat@ 123456exponent.com
                Author notes
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                [* ] Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: egoswami@ 123456exponent.com ; Tel.: +1-510-268-5032; Fax: +1-510-268-5099.
                Article
                ijerph-10-05629
                10.3390/ijerph10115629
                3863863
                24185840
                660ac650-4b50-4e8d-a478-bf59c42b32a8
                © 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

                This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

                History
                : 17 August 2013
                : 18 October 2013
                : 22 October 2013
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                exposure,domestic,asbestos fibers,take-home,epidemiology
                Public health
                exposure, domestic, asbestos fibers, take-home, epidemiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article