No Increased Risk for Mesothelioma in Relation to Natural-Occurring Asbestos in Southern Nevada

Our plain-English summary of No Increased Risk for Mesothelioma in Relation to Natural-Occurring Asbestos in Southern Nevada, by P.S. Pinheiro, H. Jin (Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 2015).

The study

• Authors: P.S. Pinheiro, H. Jin
• Journal: Journal of Thoracic Oncology
• Published: 2015;10(7):e62-3
• Type of article: Letter, Comment
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

In plain English

This is a letter to the editor. The authors, epidemiologists in Las Vegas, responded to a 2015 article by Baumann and colleagues linking natural-occurring asbestos (NOA) in Southern Nevada (Clark and Nye counties) to mesothelioma in young people and women. They argued that sex ratios and proportions of deaths do not measure risk. Using Nevada mortality files (192 deaths) and CDC data (29,663 deaths) for 1999 to 2010, they calculated age-adjusted mesothelioma death rates per 100,000. For males, the Southern Nevada rate was 1.16 (95% confidence interval 0.92 to 1.43), against 1.60 (1.58 to 1.62) in U.S. states other than Nevada. For females it was 0.33 (0.23 to 0.47) against 0.29 (0.28 to 0.29). For ages 0 to 54 it was 0.09 (0.05 to 0.15) against 0.07 (0.06 to 0.07). The authors reported that risk was not increased in Southern Nevada for any category analyzed. They said the earlier article's low sex ratio reflected significantly lower male mortality, not higher female risk. They stated strong reservations about that article's evidence.

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: Letter to the editor critiquing a published study (Baumann et al., 2015), with the authors' own reanalysis of population-based mesothelioma mortality rates
• Who was studied: Malignant mesothelioma deaths, 1999 to 2010: 192 deaths from Nevada in-state mortality files and 29,663 deaths from CDC WONDER data. Groups compared were Southern Nevada (Clark and Nye counties), the rest of Nevada, all U.S. states except Nevada, and U.S. states excluding Nevada and 15 states with commercial asbestos production.
• Exposure: Natural-occurring asbestos (NOA) in Southern Nevada, examined indirectly by area of residence. No fiber type or exposure measurement is given. The categories the earlier article used as markers of NOA exposure were female sex and younger age.
• Main results:
  • The authors reported that mesothelioma risk was not increased in Southern Nevada for any category analyzed.
  • Males: the age-adjusted mesothelioma mortality rate per 100,000 was 1.16 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.43) in Southern Nevada, against 1.60 (1.58 to 1.62) in U.S. states except Nevada.
  • The authors attributed the low sex ratio found by Baumann to significantly lower than average male mortality in Southern Nevada, not to increased mortality or risk for females.
  • Females: the rate per 100,000 was 0.33 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.47) in Southern Nevada, against 0.29 (0.28 to 0.29) in U.S. states except Nevada.
  • Ages 0 to 54, sexes combined: the rate per 100,000 was 0.09 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.15) in Southern Nevada, against 0.07 (0.06 to 0.07) in U.S. states except Nevada. The authors described this as not significantly raised. For ages 0 to 49 and 0 to 59, they reported the Nevada risk was fundamentally the same as the U.S. risk.
  • All rates were per 100,000 and age adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population.
  • The authors noted that the earlier article's numbers did not add up. It mentioned a total of 31,526 deaths in the 50 U.S. states, while the figures in its Table 2 summed to 31,545.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors stated strong reservations over the evidence on mesothelioma risk in Nevada presented by Baumann et al. They suggested improved methodology to assess the relationship between NOA exposure and mesothelioma.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors noted that mesothelioma is rare and that low numbers with high variability across geographic regions make statistical analysis difficult.

Topics

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

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

Related studies

• Reply to "No Increased Risk for Mesothelioma in Relation to Natural-Occurring Asbestos in Southern Nevada" — F. Baumann, B.J. Buck, et al. (2015)
• The Presence of Asbestos in the Natural Environment is Likely Related to Mesothelioma in Young Individuals and Women from Southern Nevada — F. Baumann, B.J. Buck, et al. (2015)
• Researchers explore possible link between mesothelioma and dust emissions in southern Nevada — L.H. O'Hanlon (2013)
• Ophiolitic outcrops, naturally occurring asbestos exposure and mortality risk from malignant mesothelioma in Calabria (Southern Italy) — A. Scarselli, A. Marinaccio, et al. (2021)
• Investigating palygorskite's role in the development of mesothelioma in southern Nevada: Insights into fiber-induced carcinogenicity — D. Larson, A. Powers, et al. (2016)
• Exposures estimates of the Wittenoom mining workforce and town residents - Implications associated with risk estimation for persons exposed to asbestiform riebeckite — A.J. Rogers (2018)

Browse more research in Journal of Thoracic Oncology, or return to medical research.