Content uploaded by Elke Dopp
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Elke Dopp on Sep 26, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Genotoxic effects of asbestos fibres
... The exact relative extent of indirect chemical versus direct physical effects of asbestos fibres are still unknown (3,5). Among possible other etiological agents like ionising radiation, pleural scarring, and genetic susceptibility, SV40 contamination may represent a further risk factor for mesothelioma formation (6). ...
Fourteen primary human malignant mesothelioma (HMM) samples obtained from 14 patients were screened for point mutations and microdeletions/microinsertions in exons 1-16 of the chromosome 22q-located tumour suppressor gene neurofibromin 2 (nf2) by single strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis. In one tumour (7%) a 10 basepair microdeletion of exon 10 was detected by SSCP and subsequently characterised in detail by sequencing. Deletion of the second nf2 allele in laser-microdissected regions of the 10 bp mutation-harbouring tumour was demonstrated by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) analysis. Simultaneous comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) analysis also showed losses at chromosome 22q. Our data indicate that functional loss of the NF2 protein may be involved in the formation of a subset of HMMs.
Despite an extensive literature, the relationship between asbestos exposure and lung cancer remains the subject of controversy, related to the fact that most asbestos-associated lung cancers occur in those who are also cigarette smokers: because smoking represents the strongest identifiable lung cancer risk factor among many others, and lung cancer is not uncommon across industrialised societies, analysis of the combined (synergistic) effects of smoking and asbestos on lung cancer risk is a more complex exercise than the relationship between asbestos inhalation and mesothelioma. As a follow-on from previous reviews of prevailing evidence, this review critically evaluates more recent studies on this relationship--concentrating on those published between 1997 and 2004--including lung cancer to mesothelioma ratios, the interactive effects of cigarette smoke and asbestos in combination, and the cumulative exposure model for lung cancer induction as set forth in The Helsinki Criteria and The AWARD Criteria (as opposed to the asbestosis-->cancer model), together with discussion of differential genetic susceptibility/resistance factors for lung carcinogenesis by both cigarette smoke and asbestos. The authors conclude that: (i) the prevailing evidence strongly supports the cumulative exposure model; (ii) the criteria for probabilistic attribution of lung cancer to mixed asbestos exposures as a consequence of the production and end-use of asbestos-containing products such as insulation and asbestos-cement building materials--as embodied in The Helsinki and AWARD Criteria--conform to, and are further consolidated by, the new evidence discussed in this review; (iii) different attribution criteria (e.g., greater cumulative exposures) are appropriate for chrysotile mining/milling and perhaps for other chrysotile-only exposures, such as friction products manufacture, than for amphibole-only exposures or mixed asbestos exposures; and (iv) emerging evidence on genetic susceptibility/resistance factors for lung cancer risk as a consequence of cigarette smoking, and potentially also asbestos exposure, suggests that genotypic variation may represent an additional confounding factor potentially affecting the strength of association and hence the probability of causal contribution in the individual subject, but at present there is insufficient evidence to draw any meaningful conclusions concerning variation in asbestos-mediated lung cancer risk relative to such resistance/susceptibility factors.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.