Familial mesothelioma: a report of two families

Our plain-English summary of Familial mesothelioma: a report of two families, by S.P. Hammar, D. Bockus, F. Remington, et al (Human Pathology, 1989).

The study

• Authors: S.P. Hammar, D. Bockus, F. Remington, S. Freidman, G. LaZerte
• Journal: Human Pathology
• Published: 1989;20(2):107-12
• Type of article: Case report
• Cited by: 38 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. 000089).

Abstract

Five reports of familial mesothelioma in which mesotheliomas occurred in two or more family members have been recorded in the medical literature. In this report, we describe two examples of familial mesothelioma. In one family, three brothers who worked in the asbestos insulation industry developed mesothelioma. In the second family, the father, who was occupationally exposed to asbestos, died from a tubulopapillary peritoneal mesothelioma 11 years before his son died from an identical histologic type of peritoneal mesothelioma. Our report, as with those previously recorded, suggests that genetic factors may be important in the genesis of some mesotheliomas.

In plain English

This article is a case report of two families with more than one case of mesothelioma. In the first family, three brothers, all asbestos insulation workers, developed mesothelioma at ages 54, 58 and 66. The first and third brothers had tumors around the lung that were mainly sarcomatoid. The second brother had an abdominal tumor made of epithelial-appearing cells. Measured per gram of wet lung tissue, brother no. 1 had more than 50,000 asbestos bodies and brother no. 3 had 15,000 to 30,000. Neither showed asbestosis on microscopy. Brother no. 2's lung was not measured. In the second family, a father exposed to asbestos in the Vancouver, WA shipyards and his son both had peritoneal mesothelioma that looked essentially identical under the microscope. The son's lung held 0 to 10 asbestos bodies per gram of wet lung tissue. This was well within the lower limits seen in the general urban population with no occupational history of asbestos exposure. The authors concluded that genetic factors may be important in some mesotheliomas. They added that the reported family cases are few, so more examples are needed.

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: Case report of two families (familial mesothelioma), with a discussion comparing them with earlier published family reports
• Who was studied: Two families. Family 1: three brothers who were asbestos insulation workers, aged 54, 58 and 66 when they developed mesothelioma. Family 2: a father and his son, both with peritoneal mesothelioma.
• Exposure: The three brothers worked in the asbestos insulation industry. The father was exposed to asbestos as a shipyard worker in Vancouver, WA during World War II. The authors state the son was probably not exposed. No fiber types are named.
• Main results:
  • Brother no. 1 had more than 50,000 asbestos bodies per gram of wet lung tissue at autopsy.
  • Brother no. 3 had between 15,000 and 30,000 asbestos bodies per gram of wet lung tissue.
  • Neither brother no. 1 nor brother no. 3 had microscopic features of asbestosis.
  • Brother no. 1's mesothelioma was biphasic (mainly sarcomatoid). Brother no. 3's was mainly sarcomatoid with some epithelial features.
  • Brother no. 2's abdominal mesothelioma was made of large epithelial-appearing cells. His lung tissue was not analyzed for asbestos content.
  • For all three brothers, the time from first asbestos exposure to mesothelioma was more than 25 years.
  • In family 2, the father and son both had peritoneal mesotheliomas that were essentially identical under the microscope.
  • The son's lung tissue held 0 to 10 asbestos bodies per gram of wet lung tissue. The authors describe this as well within the lower limits seen in the general urban population with no occupational history of asbestos exposure.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that this report, like earlier ones, raises the possibility that genetic factors may be important in some mesotheliomas. They also wrote that asbestos or another tumor-causing agent may be needed to cause mesothelioma in a genetically susceptible person.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors state that reported cases of familial mesothelioma are few, so more examples are needed before family involvement can be proposed.
  • The authors note that the lowest amount of asbestos capable of causing mesothelioma has not been determined. This is relevant to the son's low lung asbestos count.

Topics

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

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Mesothelioma, Tubulopapillary, Peritoneal Mesothelioma.

Related studies

• Primary malignant tumors of peritoneal and retroperitoneal origin: clinical and imaging features — M.G. Lubner, J.L. Hinshaw, et al. (2014)
• A cluster of familial malignant mesothelioma with del(9p) as the sole chromosomal anomaly — M. Musti, D. Cavone, et al. (2002)
• Familial clustering of malignant mesothelioma — B. Risberg, J. Nickels, et al. (1980)
• IgG4-producing marginal zone B-cell lymphoma — Y. Sato, K. Takata, et al. (2008)
• Imaging features, complications and differential diagnoses of abdominal cystic lymphangiomas — M. Raufaste Tistet, O. Ernst, et al. (2020)
• Differentiating a large abdominal cystic lymphangioma from multicystic mesothelioma: report of a case — H. Nagata, Y. Yonemura, et al. (2014)

Browse more research in Human Pathology, or return to medical research.