Report of the Advisory Committee on Asbestos Cancers to the Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer

Our plain-English summary of Report of the Advisory Committee on Asbestos Cancers to the Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1973).

The study

• Journal: British Journal of Industrial Medicine
• Published: 1973;30(2):180-6
• Cited by: 3 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Free full text
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M nos. 002406, 004332).

Abstract

In 1964 the Geographical Pathology Committee of the International Union against Cancer (UICC) set up a working group on asbestos and cancer and later issued a Report and Recommendations (1965). A further meeting was held at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon, France, on 5 and 6 October 1972. This was organized jointly with the Medical Research Council Pneumoconiosis Research Unit. The report and recommendations given here will also be published by IARC in 1973, together with the complete proceedings of the meeting. The Committee consisted of three panels—Epidemiology, Pathology, and Physics and Chemistry.

In plain English

This is not a research study but an advisory committee's report to the Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC held an international conference in Lyon in October 1972, with 137 participants from 20 countries; the committee then reported on evidence since 1964. It answered general questions and recommended research. It stated that all major commercial asbestos types can cause lung carcinoma, with clear risk differences by fibre type and nature of exposure. It stated that the exposure-response evidence suggested an excess lung carcinoma risk is not detectable when occupational exposure has been low. For mesothelioma, it reported that all commercial types except anthophyllite may be responsible. The risk was greatest with crocidolite, less with amosite and apparently less with chrysotile, and some cases had no known association with asbestos. Cigarette smoking was described as enhancing lung carcinoma risk in asbestos-exposed workers. Prospective surveys of asbestos-exposed occupational groups generally showed a small excess of some other cancers, especially gastrointestinal. It said there was at present no evidence of a mesothelioma risk or of lung damage from asbestos to the general public.

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: Expert advisory committee report: a general review of evidence in question-and-answer form, plus recommendations for further research
• Who was studied: No study population. The committee had three panels (Epidemiology, Pathology, Physics and Chemistry). It prepared its report after an IARC international conference held in Lyon, France, in October 1972, which had 137 participants from 20 countries
• Exposure: Asbestos exposure in general, in occupational and environmental settings, including the commercial fibre types crocidolite, amosite, chrysotile and anthophyllite
• Main results:
  • The committee answered yes to whether all major commercial types of asbestos can cause lung carcinoma. It cited exposure-response epidemiology and animal studies, and it noted clear differences in human risk by fibre type and nature of exposure
  • The exposure-response evidence suggested that an excess lung carcinoma risk is not detectable when occupational exposure has been low. The committee added that such low occupational exposures were almost certainly much greater than the public's exposure from general air pollution
  • For mesothelioma, the evidence indicated that all commercial types of asbestos except anthophyllite may be responsible
  • Mesothelioma risk was greatest with crocidolite, less with amosite, and apparently less with chrysotile. With amosite and chrysotile, the risk appeared higher in manufacturing than in mining and milling
  • Population studies showed that a proportion of mesothelioma cases have no known association with asbestos exposure
  • Mesothelial tumours were associated with air pollution near crocidolite mines and near factories using mixtures of fibre types, under conditions many years ago. The committee stated there was no evidence of a risk to the general public at present
  • Cigarette smoking was described as an important factor enhancing lung carcinoma risk in asbestos-exposed workers, in both men and women
  • No association had been demonstrated between cigarette smoking and mesotheliomas
  • Animal experiments so far indicated that waxes and oils are unlikely to be relevant as contributory factors in mesothelioma
  • Prospective surveys of occupational groups exposed to asbestos had in general shown a small excess risk of some other cancers, especially of the gastrointestinal tract. This excess was relatively small compared with that for bronchial cancer
  • An association with ovarian tumours was not supported by the first large mortality survey of women previously exposed to asbestos
  • The available evidence did not indicate a cancer risk from asbestos fibres in water, beverages, food, or fluids used for giving drugs
  • There was at present no evidence of lung damage by asbestos to the general public
  • Pleural plaques have been associated with past exposure to all commercial types of asbestos. Additional factors are involved, and not all pleural plaques are associated with asbestos
• The authors' conclusion: The committee concluded that since 1964 the evidence relating past asbestos exposure to mesotheliomas had been greatly strengthened, with risk differing by occupation and fibre type. It recommended further research in epidemiology, pathology, and physics and chemistry

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Pathology, UICC, IARC, Pneumoconiosis, Epidemiology.

Related studies

• Radiologic Considerations and Standardization of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Imaging Within Clinical Trials: Consensus Statement from the NCI Thoracic Malignancy Steering Committee - International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer - Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation Clinical Trials Planning Meeting — R.R. Gill, A.S. Tsao, et al. (2019)
• Current and Future Management of Malignant Mesothelioma: A Consensus Report from the National Cancer Institute Thoracic Malignancy Steering Committee, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation — A.S. Tsao, O.W. Lindwasser, et al. (2018)
• The Use of Radiation Therapy for the Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Expert Opinion from the National Cancer Institute Thoracic Malignancy Steering Committee, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation — D.R. Gomez, A. Rimner, et al. (2019)
• Asbestos and cancer; the report and recommendations of a working group convened under the auspices of the Geographical Pathology Committee of the International Union Against Cancer — F. Turgeon, J. Devries, et al. (1965)
• Progress of malignant mesothelioma research in basic science: A review of the 14th international conference of the international mesothelioma interest group (iMig2018) — L. Wu, I. Dell'Anno, et al. (2019)
• Criteria for the diagnosis of asbestosis and considerations in the attribution of lung cancer and mesothelioma to asbestos exposure. Prepared by the Medical Advisory Panel to the Asbestos International Association — (1982)

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