Asbestos exposure and histological subtype of malignant mesothelioma

• Published in: Occupational and environmental medicine (London, England) Vol. 73; no. 11; pp. 749 - 752
• Main Authors: Franklin, P, Alfonso, H, Reid, A, Olsen, N, Shilkin, K B, Brims, F, de Klerk, N, Musk, A W
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 01.11.2016; BMJ Publishing Group LTD
• Subjects: Aged; Asbestos; Asbestos mining; Asbestos, Crocidolite - adverse effects; Cellular biology; Classification; Committees; Cytology; Epidemiology; Ethics committees; Exposure; Histology; Humans; Logistic Models; Lung Neoplasms - chemically induced; Lung Neoplasms - pathology; Lungs; Male; Mesothelioma; Mesothelioma - chemically induced; Mesothelioma - pathology; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Middle Aged; Mining; Mining towns; Occupational Diseases - chemically induced; Occupational Diseases - pathology; Occupational Exposure - adverse effects; Occupational hazards; Pathology; Prognosis; Proportions; Registries; Studies; Surveys and Questionnaires; Western Australia; Workplace; Western Australia; exposure
• ISSN: 1351-0711; 1470-7926
• DOI: 10.1136/oemed-2016-103721

BackgroundMalignant mesothelioma (MM) has distinct histological subtypes (epithelioid, sarcomatoid and biphasic) with variable behaviour and prognoses. It is well recognised that survival time varies with the histological subtype of MM. It is not known, however, if asbestos exposure characteristics (type of asbestos, degree of exposure) are associated with different histological subtypes.AimTo determine if the pathological MM subtype is associated with the type of asbestos or the attributes of asbestos exposure.MethodsCases of MM for the period 1962 until 2012, their main histological subtype and their most significant source of asbestos exposure were collected from the Western Australian Mesothelioma Registry. Exposure characteristics included, degree of asbestos exposure (including total days exposed, years since first exposure and, for crocidolite only, calculated cumulative exposure), source of exposure (occupational or environmental), form of asbestos handled (raw or processed) and type of asbestos (crocidolite only or mixed fibres).ResultsPatients with the biphasic subtype were more likely to have occupational exposure (OR 1.83, 1.12 to 2.85) and exposure to raw fibres (OR 1.58, 1.19 to 2.10). However, differences between subtypes in the proportions with these different exposure characteristics were small and unlikely to be biologically relevant. Other indicators of asbestos exposure were not associated with the histological subtype of mesothelioma.ConclusionsThere was no strong evidence of a consistent role of asbestos exposure indicators in determining the histological subtype of MM.