SILICA, ASBESTOS, MAN-MADE MINERAL FIBERS, AND CANCER

Citation
K. Steenland et L. Stayner, SILICA, ASBESTOS, MAN-MADE MINERAL FIBERS, AND CANCER, CCC. Cancer causes & control, 8(3), 1997, pp. 491-503
Citations number
113
Categorie Soggetti
Oncology,"Public, Environmental & Occupation Heath
ISSN journal
09575243
Volume
8
Issue
3
Year of publication
1997
Pages
491 - 503
Database
ISI
SICI code
0957-5243(1997)8:3<491:SAMMFA>2.0.ZU;2-S
Abstract
Approximately three million workers in the United States are estimated to be exposed to silica, man-made mineral fibers, and asbestos. The l ung is the primary target organ of concern. Each of these substances i s composed predominantly of silicon and oxygen; asbestos and silica ar e crystalline, and asbestos and man-made mineral fibers are fibers. Ma n-made mineral fibers and asbestos are used as insulating agents, with the former having generally replaced the latter in recent years. Sili ca is used in foundries, pottery, and brick making, and is encountered by miners. A meta-analysis of 16 of the largest studies with well-doc umented silica exposure and low probability of confounding by other oc cupational exposures, indicates a relative risk (RR) of 1.3 (95 percen t confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-1.4). Lung cancer risks are highest a nd most consistent for silicotics, who have received the highest doses (RR = 2.3, CI = 2.2-2.4, across 19 studies). The data for mineral fib ers continue to support the International Association for Research on Cancer's 1988 judgment that mineral fibers are a possible human carcin ogen (Group 2B). Recent epidemiologic studies provide little evidence for lung carcinogenicity for either glass wool or rock/slag wool. Cera mic fibers, a much less common exposure than glass wool and rock/slag wool, are of concern because of positive animal studies, but there are insufficient human data. Regarding asbestos, its carcinogenicity for the lung and mesothelium is well established. With regard to the contr oversy over chrysotile and mesothelioma, the data suggest chrysotile d oes cause mesothelioma, although it may be less potent than amphibole asbestos.