Pleural mesothelioma and asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment-response to Marsh and Benson's letter

Our plain-English summary of Pleural mesothelioma and asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment-response to Marsh and Benson's letter, by D. Ferrante, D. Mirabelli, S. Tunesi, et al (Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2017).

The study

• Authors: D. Ferrante, D. Mirabelli, S. Tunesi, B. Terracini, C. Magnani
• Journal: Occupational and Environmental Medicine
• Published: 2017;74(2):157-158
• Type of article: Letter, Comment
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This is a letter in which the authors replied to criticism from Marsh and Benson of their earlier case-control study of pleural mesothelioma in the Casale Monferrato area of Italy. Marsh and Benson had objected that the authors had not always used the same reference group. In response, the authors repeated their secondary analyses using the reference group from their main analysis: people with no occupational, environmental or familial/domestic exposure above background. The reanalysis covered 200 cases and 348 controls, with odds ratios adjusted for age, sex and type of interview. For occupational exposure, the odds ratio rose from 7.6 (95% CI 2.8 to 20.5) at 0.1 to under 1 fibre/mL years to 63.5 (21.8 to 185.0) at 10 or more. For environmental exposure, it rose from 10.0 (4.2 to 24.1) to 51.5 (4.4 to 605.6). That top environmental group contained 7 cases and 1 control. The authors compared their findings with other published studies. They concluded that their results were consistent with the literature and that exposure, rather than its route, is the relevant factor.

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 (authors' reply to correspondence) reporting a reanalysis of the authors' own previously published case-control study
• Who was studied: 200 pleural mesothelioma cases and 348 controls from the Casale Monferrato area, Italy (Casale case-control study)
• Exposure: Cumulative asbestos exposure in fibre/mL years, analysed separately by route (occupational and environmental). The reference group had no occupational, environmental or familial/domestic exposures above background. Odds ratios were adjusted by age, sex and type of interview.
• Main results:
  • Occupational exposure, compared with the reference group (8 cases, 106 controls): odds ratio 7.6 (95% CI 2.8 to 20.5) at 0.1 to under 1 fibre/mL years (23 cases, 61 controls)
  • Occupational exposure: odds ratio 19.3 (95% CI 7.2 to 51.7) at 1 to under 10 fibre/mL years (43 cases, 37 controls)
  • Occupational exposure: odds ratio 63.5 (95% CI 21.8 to 185.0) at 10 or more fibre/mL years (39 cases, 15 controls)
  • Environmental exposure: odds ratio 10.0 (95% CI 4.2 to 24.1) at 0.1 to under 1 fibre/mL years (69 cases, 119 controls)
  • Environmental exposure: odds ratio 23.5 (95% CI 9.6 to 57.2) at 1 to under 10 fibre/mL years (89 cases, 68 controls)
  • Environmental exposure: odds ratio 51.5 (95% CI 4.4 to 605.6) at 10 or more fibre/mL years (7 cases, 1 control)
  • The authors reported that results from their other secondary analyses, including those stratified by probability of exposure, were similar to their main analysis
  • In the authors' study, the ratio between the odds ratios for the over-10 and the 1 to 10 fibre/mL years categories was 3.55
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that their results are consistent with the literature, and that exposure, rather than its route, is the relevant factor
• Limitations the authors state:
  • Because of space constraints, the authors showed new results only for occupational and environmental exposures

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Pleural Mesothelioma, Asbestos Exposure, Case-Control Study.

Related studies

• Authors's response: Pleural mesothelioma and occupational and non-occupational asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment — D. Ferrante, D. Mirabelli, et al. (2016)
• Pleural mesothelioma and occupational and non-occupational asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment — D. Ferrante, D. Mirabelli, et al. (2016)
• Response to: 'Pleural mesothelioma and occupational and non-occupational asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment' by Ferrante et al — G.M. Marsh, S.M. Benson (2017)
• Response to: Pleural mesothelioma, and occupational and non-occupational asbestos exposure: a case-control study with quantitative risk assessment — P. Boffetta (2016)
• Re: Brent L. Finley, Stacey M. Benson & Gary M. Marsh (2017): Cosmetic talc as a risk factor for pleural mesothelioma: a weight of evidence evaluation of the epidemiology, Inhalation Toxicology, DOI: 10.1080/08958378.2017.1336187 — M.M. Finkelstein (2017)
• Letter concerning: Occupational exposures to cosmetic talc and risk of mesothelioma: an updated pooled cohort and statistical power analysis with consideration of latency period by Gary M. Marsh et al. (Inhal Toxicol. 2019 Aug 5:1-11. doi:10.1080/08958378.2019.1645768) — M.M. Finkelstein (2019)

Browse more research in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, or return to medical research.