Malignant pleural mesotheliomas: an environmental health risk in southeast Turkey

Our plain-English summary of Malignant pleural mesotheliomas: an environmental health risk in southeast Turkey, by K.M. Müller, M. Fischer (Respiration; International Review of Thoracic Diseases, 2000).

The study

• Authors: K.M. Müller, M. Fischer
• Journal: Respiration; International Review of Thoracic Diseases
• Published: 2000;67(6):608-9
• Type of article: Editorial, Comment
• Cited by: 4 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This two-page editorial was not an original study. It commented on two papers by Senyigit and colleagues in the same issue on malignant pleural mesothelioma from environmental asbestos exposure in southeast Turkey, including CT findings in 117 patients. The authors wrote that, by their information, about 113 asbestos deposits are known in Turkey (65% containing chrysotile, 39% tremolite, 1% crocidolite), and that farming asbestos-containing land and household use of asbestos-containing whitewash, roofing, cleaning liquids and toothpaste sometimes caused considerable exposure to asbestos dust. They noted that Senyigit and colleagues reported a decline in mesothelioma in some areas after public information campaigns and a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.3. Among Turkish patients seen in Germany after emigrating, the authors described comparatively young patients, a markedly higher share of women than after occupational exposure, and tremolite fibers in lung tissue. The authors concluded that knowing natural fiber types is decisive for telling environmental from occupational exposure. They cautioned that CT has limits in showing tumor spread into the lung, and that pleural plaques are not proven to be precancerous.

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: Editorial commenting on two papers by Senyigit et al. in the same journal issue; it reports no original data
• Who was studied: No population of its own. It discussed Senyigit et al.'s study of 117 patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma from environmental exposure in southeast Turkey. It also mentioned Turkish patients seen by the authors in Germany who developed mesothelioma after emigrating, with no number given.
• Exposure: Environmental (non-occupational) asbestos exposure from natural deposits in Turkey containing chrysotile, tremolite and crocidolite. Sources named were farming asbestos-containing land and household use of asbestos-containing whitewash, roofing, cleaning liquids and toothpaste.
• Main results:
  • According to the authors' information, about 113 asbestos deposits are known in Turkey: 65% contain chrysotile, 39% tremolite and 1% crocidolite (percentages as printed).
  • The authors wrote that farming asbestos-containing land and household use of asbestos-containing whitewash, roofing, cleaning liquids and toothpaste sometimes caused considerable exposure to asbestos dusts.
  • The authors noted that Senyigit et al. reported a decline in mesothelioma incidence in some affected areas after public information campaigns.
  • In Senyigit et al.'s environmentally exposed patients, the sex ratio was nearly equal (male:female 1:1.3).
  • The authors stated that, in their own work, they see Turkish patients who developed mesothelioma after emigrating to Germany.
  • The authors described these patients as comparatively young when they fell ill, compared with patients after purely occupational exposure. The exact ages are garbled in the text.
  • The authors stated that the share of women affected is markedly higher in these patients than after purely occupational exposure.
  • In these cases, the authors stated, tremolite fiber dust found by analysis in lung tissue indicates environmental exposure.
  • The authors stated that it is now widely believed that tremolite is much more carcinogenic than chrysotile.
  • The authors stated that pleural plaques are not proven to be precancerous lesions.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that knowing the natural asbestos fiber types is of decisive importance when environmental exposure must be distinguished from occupational exposure.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The long latency period of mesothelioma limits, for now, any assessment of preventive measures.
  • The value of CT for judging involvement of the lung tissue needs critical analysis; imaging has reached its limit in showing tumor spread into the lung.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Mesothelioma.

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

Related studies

• Incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma due to environmental asbestos fiber exposure in the southeast of Turkey — A. Senyiğit, C. Babayiğit, et al. (2000)
• Environmental asbestos-related pleural plaque in southeast of Turkey — G. Ates, T. Yildiz, et al. (2010)
• Malignant pleural mesothelioma caused by environmental exposure to asbestos in the Southeast of Turkey: CT findings in 117 patients — A. Senyiğit, H. Bayram, et al. (2000)
• Lung diseases due to environmental exposures to erionite and asbestos in Turkey — S. Emri, A. Demir, et al. (2002)
• Assessment of environmental asbestos exposure in Turkey by bronchoalveolar lavage — P. Dumortier, L. Coplü, et al. (1998)
• Determination of environmental exposure to asbestos (tremolite) and mesothelioma risks in the southeastern region of Turkey — A. Senyigit, A. Dalgic, et al. (2004)

Browse more research in Respiration; International Review of Thoracic Diseases, or return to medical research.