Low dose exposure to natural and man made fibres and the risk of cancer: towards a collaborative European epidemiology. Report of a workshop held in Paris , 10-12 June, 1991

Our plain-English summary of Low dose exposure to natural and man made fibres and the risk of cancer: towards a collaborative European epidemiology. Report of a workshop held in Paris , 10-12 June, 1991, by A.J. Valleron, J. Bignon, J.M. Hughes, et al (British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1992).

The study

• Authors: A.J. Valleron, J. Bignon, J.M. Hughes, T.W. Hesterberg, T. Schneider, G.J. Burdett, P. Brochard, D. Hémon
• Journal: British Journal of Industrial Medicine
• Published: 1992;49(9):606-14
• Cited by: 9 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 004931).

Summary of the article

This report summarised a workshop held in Paris on 10-12 June 1991 on the risk of cancer from low dose exposure to natural fibres such as asbestos and to man made mineral fibres (MMMFs). The workshop aimed to update knowledge of these risks and to outline suitable epidemiological methods for studying low, repeated exposures to carcinogens. Scientists from 13 European countries, North and South America, Japan and Africa took part. Sessions covered seven themes, each led by a moderator: dose-effect relations at low exposure, laboratory approaches, measurement of dose, exposure standards, cofactors, methods for collaborative epidemiology, and tools for pooling data. Ten ongoing European studies were also presented. Participants reported that, fibre for fibre, risk appeared greater for amphibole than for chrysotile and for long than for short fibres. Extrapolating occupational dose-response data to low levels, such as those in buildings, suggested public health risks below what can reasonably be measured. Risks below measurable levels, and for custodians and maintenance workers exposed to peaks, remained unanswered. Glass wool and continuous filament glass had not been associated with increased lung cancer risk. Risk from slag and rock wools remained controversial. Special attention was urged for long, thin, durable fibres such as some ceramic fibres. Because huge sample sizes would be needed, the report concluded that multicentre studies are essential.

PubMed has no abstract for this study, and the article doesn't print one. We wrote this summary from the full article with the help of AI. It is not the authors' wording.

In plain English

This article reported a workshop held in Paris on 10-12 June 1991; it was not an original study. Scientists from several continents discussed low dose cancer risk from asbestos and man made mineral fibres. The report described average airborne levels of fibres longer than 5 micrometres in the occupied spaces of buildings without significant damage as about 0.0001 fibres per ml for man made fibres and asbestos, with personal exposures significantly higher for maintenance workers who regularly disturb asbestos materials. The workshop concluded that extrapolating from worker data to low levels, such as those in buildings, suggested public health risks below what could reasonably be measured. It said the possible risk from exposures below a measurable level, and the risk for custodians and maintenance workers exposed at times to peak doses, remained unanswered. It noted that glass wool and continuous filament glass fibres had not been associated with increased lung cancer risk. It also noted that some ceramic fibres had produced cancers in experimental animals by inhalation. The authors concluded that multicentre studies were essential because huge sample sizes were 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: Meeting report summarising a scientific workshop (not original research)
• Who was studied: Workshop participants: scientists from 13 European countries, North and South America, Japan and Africa, meeting in Paris, 10-12 June 1991
• Exposure: Low dose exposure to natural fibres (asbestos, including chrysotile and amphiboles) and man made mineral fibres (glass wool, rock wool, slag wool, ceramic fibres), including in buildings
• Main results:
  • Workshop conclusion: extrapolation from occupational dose-response relations to indoor or outdoor low dose levels, such as might be found in buildings, suggests that public health risks are below those that can reasonably be measured
  • The workshop said two questions remained unanswered: the possible risk associated with exposures below a measurable level, and the risk for custodians and maintenance workers who can at times be exposed to peak doses
  • Reported average airborne concentrations of fibres longer than 5 micrometres in the occupied spaces of buildings without significant damage were of the order of 0.0001 f/ml for MMMF and asbestos
  • The report said personal exposures will be significantly higher for maintenance workers who regularly disturb asbestos materials
  • The report's summary of the evidence was that, fibre for fibre, risk is appreciably greater for amphibole than for chrysotile exposure
  • Workshop conclusion: exposures to glass wool and to continuous filament glass fibres have not been associated with increased risk of lung cancer; the size of the lung cancer risk linked to slag and rock wools remains controversial
  • Long thin durable fibres such as some ceramic fibres have been shown to produce cancers in experimental animals by inhalation
  • Using data from a paper by Hughes and Weill, the report estimated that a cohort study would need two groups of 5 000 subjects to show the relative risk of lung cancer of 1.05 expected from model projections for subjects exposed for 20 years at 0.5 f/ml
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that, because huge sample sizes are needed, multicentre studies are essential to give valid information on the possible effects in humans of low level exposure to natural and man made fibres
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors acknowledged deficiencies and uncertainties in the dose-response relations between asbestos exposure and lung cancer and mesothelioma on which the extrapolations rest
  • The report noted that the risk models may overestimate the values at low doses

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Epidemiology, Amphibole Group, Chrysotile, Dose-response relationship, Lung Cancer.

Related studies

• Assessment of the toxicity of man-made fibres. A final report of a workshop held in Paris, France 3-4 February 1994 — J. Bignon, P. Brochard, et al. (1995)
• Occupational cancer in a Paris suburb: first results of a proactive research study in Seine Saint-Denis — Reseau "Surveiller les Cancers D'origine Professionnelle en Seine, Saint-Denis" Reseau SCOP 93 (2005)
• European Code against Cancer 4th Edition: Environment, occupation and cancer — C. Espina, K. Straif, et al. (2015)
• Toward Understanding of Environmental Risk Factors in Systemic Sclerosis — L. Ouchene, A. Muntyanu, et al. (2021)
• Differences in the sensitivity of hamster and rat lung cells exposed in vitro to natural and man-made fibres — M. Aufderheide, J.W. Knebel, et al. (1996)
• Occupational exposure to asbestos and man-made vitreous fibres and risk of lung cancer: a multicentre case-control study in Europe — R. Carel, A.C. Olsson, et al. (2007)

Browse more research in British Journal of Industrial Medicine, or return to medical research.