Environmental asbestos exposure and cancer mortality

Our plain-English summary of Environmental asbestos exposure and cancer mortality, by M. Neuberger, M. Kundi, H.P. Friedl (Archives of Environmental Health, 1984).

The study

• Authors: M. Neuberger, M. Kundi, H.P. Friedl
• Journal: Archives of Environmental Health
• Published: 1984;39(4):261-5
• Cited by: 16 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 000561).

Abstract

From 1970 to 1980, mortality from cancer of the lung and stomach was analyzed in a town with asbestos deposits and in a town with asbestos processing. The populations of the entire country, the province, the district, and of all communities of the same size and agricultural index were used as references. In the town with asbestos contamination of air and water from natural tremolite deposits and an endemic occurrence of pleural plaques, no increased risk for lung or stomach cancer was found. In the town with asbestos cement production lung cancer rates were lower in males and higher in females, and stomach cancer rates were lower than expected. No significant differences could be attributed to environmental asbestos exposure.

In plain English

This Austrian study counted deaths from lung and stomach cancer from 1970 to 1980, using death certificates, in two towns. It compared them with the numbers expected from five reference populations, one of them all of Austria. One town lay in an area of natural tremolite asbestos deposits, with asbestos in soil, air and drinking water and an increased prevalence of pleural plaques. The other surrounded an asbestos cement factory. Results were standardized mortality ratios (SMRs), where 100 means deaths as expected. Against Austria, lung cancer in the deposits town was not significantly different (men: 9 deaths, SMR 76; women: 3 deaths, SMR 105), while stomach cancer was significantly lower in men (2 deaths against 7.3 expected). In the cement town, lung cancer was significantly lower in men (30 against 56.2 expected) and not significantly higher in women (11 against 8.6). Stomach cancer there was significantly lower in women against most references. The authors concluded that no cancer excess from environmental asbestos exposure was detected. They noted that the deposits town was too small to detect risks below about twofold, and that local smoking data were lacking.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Community mortality comparison: observed deaths in two towns (and their districts) compared with expected deaths, calculated as standardized mortality ratios against five reference populations (Austria, the province, the district, communities of the same size class, and communities with the same agricultural index)
• Who was studied: Residents of two Austrian towns, 1970 to 1980: a town with asbestos deposits (population printed as 3.412 in 1971, meaning 3,412, since the table uses a period as the thousands separator) and a town with asbestos processing (10.627 in 1971, 11.039 in 1981), plus their districts and provinces
• Exposure: Environmental asbestos: in one town, natural tremolite deposits (tremolite mined until 1945), with asbestos still found in field and vineyard soil, the air and drinking water; in the other, residence around the oldest asbestos cement factory in the world, which processes about 90% of asbestos imported to Austria (fiber type not stated)
• Main results:
  • Lung cancer, town with asbestos deposits, against Austria: men 9 observed vs 11.8 expected, SMR 76; women 3 observed vs 2.9 expected, SMR 105. After adjusting for community size and agricultural index, SMRs were lower but not statistically significant.
  • Lung cancer, town with asbestos processing, against Austria: men 30 observed vs 56.2 expected, SMR 53, significantly lower; women 11 observed vs 8.6 expected, SMR 128, not significantly higher. Against the district alone, the women's SMR was 211, marked significant (p less than 0.05).
  • Stomach cancer, town with asbestos deposits: significantly lower in men with every reference population (2 observed vs 7.3 expected from Austria, SMR 28); women 5 observed vs 7.6 expected, SMR 66, not significant.
  • Stomach cancer, town with asbestos processing: women 14 observed; SMR 64 against Austria (not marked significant), and significantly lower against the province (SMR 49), the district (47), and the community size (52) and agricultural index (51) references. Men: SMR 79 against Austria, significantly lower only against the province (68) and the district (62).
  • The authors judged the slightly higher female lung cancer rate in the processing town possibly a chance finding, not attributable to environmental asbestos exposure.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors found no evidence of cancer excess from environmental asbestos exposure in this study. They suggested that low levels of environmental asbestos exposure can lead to endemic pleural plaques without increasing cancer rates, and stated that the result cannot be extrapolated to countries with higher environmental exposure.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • Because the deposits town was small, a small cancer excess could not be ruled out; only relative risks greater than 2 would have been detected.
  • In the asbestos cement town, outdoor concentrations were measured only near the plant, and dilution of exposure across the population could lead to underestimation of risk. Inclusion of occupationally exposed people could lead to overestimation.
  • No smoking data were available for the communities studied, so no clear conclusions could be drawn about smoking.
  • Changes in nutrition, a confounding factor for stomach cancer, could not be accounted for.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Lung cancer, Stomach cancer.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Asbestos Exposure, Tremolite, Endemic, Pleural Plaques, Stomach Cancer, Asbestos-Cement, Lung Cancer.

Related studies

• Excess mortality from stomach cancer, lung cancer, and asbestosis and/or mesothelioma in crocidolite mining districts in South Africa — J.L. Botha, L.M. Irwig, et al. (1986)
• Environmental and ecological factors of stomach cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review study on ecological studies — S. Khazaei, A. Mohammadbeigi, et al. (2020)
• Health implications of environmental exposure to asbestos — J.C. McDonald (1985)
• Exposure to nitrosamines, carbon black, asbestos, and talc and mortality from stomach, lung, and laryngeal cancer in a cohort of rubber workers — K. Straif, U. Keil, et al. (2000)
• Exposure to chrysotile mining dust and digestive cancer mortality in a Chinese miner/miller cohort — S. Lin, X. Wang, et al. (2014)
• Mortality among unionized construction plasterers and cement masons — F. Stern, E. Lehman, et al. (2001)

Browse more research in Archives of Environmental Health, or return to medical research.