Literature DB >> 15764479

The biopersistence of Canadian chrysotile asbestos following inhalation: final results through 1 year after cessation of exposure.

David Bernstein1, Rick Rogers, Paul Smith.   

Abstract

Chrysotile asbestos, a serpentine mineral, has been shown to be notably different from amphibole asbestos such as amosite, crocidolite, and tremolite in that chrysotile once inhaled is rapidly removed from the lung while the amphiboles persist. This has been demonstrated for three different chrysotile samples from Canada, the United States, and Brazil. The initial results of the inhalation biopersistence study on the Canadian chrysotile were reported earlier. This article presents the full results through 365 days after cessation of exposure. In order to fully understand the dynamics of the clearance of chrysotile from the lung, the study included a standardised inhalation biopersistence study following the recommendations of the European Commission (EC) Interim Protocol for the Inhalation Biopersistence of synthetic mineral fibers (Bernstein & Riego-Sintes, 1999) in which the lungs were digested to evaluate fiber content remaining. In addition, confocal microscopy was used to examine lungs in three dimensions to determine where and what size the remaining fibers were in the lung tissue. The results showed that Canadian chrysotile is cleared from the lung with a clearance half-time of 11.4 days for the fibers longer than 20 microm. Canadian chrysotile clears in a range similar to that of glass and stone wools. It remains less biopersistent than ceramic and special purpose glasses and considerably less biopersistent than amphibole asbestos. At 1 yr after cessation of exposure, no long (L>20 microm) chrysotile fibers remained in the lung. In contrast, with amosite asbestos there were 4 x 10 (5) long fibers (L>20 microm) remaining in the lungs at one year after cessation of exposure (Hesterberg et al., 1998). These results fully support the differentiation of chrysotile from amphiboles reported in recent evaluations of available epidemiological studies (Hodgson & Darnton, 2000; Berman & Crump, 2004).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15764479     DOI: 10.1080/08958370590885663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Inhal Toxicol        ISSN: 0895-8378            Impact factor:   2.724


  10 in total

Review 1.  Pulmonary endpoints (lung carcinomas and asbestosis) following inhalation exposure to asbestos.

Authors:  Brooke T Mossman; Morton Lippmann; Thomas W Hesterberg; Karl T Kelsey; Aaron Barchowsky; James C Bonner
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 6.393

Review 2.  Health risk of chrysotile revisited.

Authors:  David Bernstein; Jacques Dunnigan; Thomas Hesterberg; Robert Brown; Juan Antonio Legaspi Velasco; Raúl Barrera; John Hoskins; Allen Gibbs
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.635

3.  Amphibole, but not chrysotile, asbestos induces anti-nuclear autoantibodies and IL-17 in C57BL/6 mice.

Authors:  Aaron Ferro; Christian Nash Zebedeo; Chad Davis; Kok Whei Ng; Jean C Pfau
Journal:  J Immunotoxicol       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 3.000

4.  The fate of chrysotile-induced multipolar mitosis and aneuploid population in cultured lung cancer cells.

Authors:  Beatriz de Araujo Cortez; Gonzalo Quassollo; Alfredo Caceres; Glaucia Maria Machado-Santelli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Durability and inflammogenic impact of carbon nanotubes compared with asbestos fibres.

Authors:  Megan J Osmond-McLeod; Craig A Poland; Fiona Murphy; Lynne Waddington; Howard Morris; Stephen C Hawkins; Steve Clark; Rob Aitken; Maxine J McCall; Ken Donaldson
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 9.400

Review 6.  Molecular and cellular mechanism of lung injuries due to exposure to sulfur mustard: a review.

Authors:  Mostafa Ghanei; Ali Amini Harandi
Journal:  Inhal Toxicol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.724

Review 7.  Quantification of short and long asbestos fibers to assess asbestos exposure: a review of fiber size toxicity.

Authors:  Guillaume Boulanger; Pascal Andujar; Jean-Claude Pairon; Marie-Annick Billon-Galland; Chantal Dion; Pascal Dumortier; Patrick Brochard; Annie Sobaszek; Pierre Bartsch; Christophe Paris; Marie-Claude Jaurand
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 5.984

Review 8.  A Review of Asbestos Bioweathering by Siderophore-Producing Pseudomonas: A Potential Strategy of Bioremediation.

Authors:  Sébastien R David; Valérie A Geoffroy
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2020-11-26

9.  A biopersistence study following exposure to chrysotile asbestos alone or in combination with fine particles.

Authors:  D M Bernstein; K Donaldson; U Decker; S Gaering; P Kunzendorf; J Chevalier; S E Holm
Journal:  Inhal Toxicol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.724

10.  Tumors that mimic asbestos-related mesothelioma: time to consider a genetics-based tumor registry?

Authors:  Brent D Kerger; Robert C James; David A Galbraith
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 4.599

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.