Roberto Pasetto1, Benedetto Terracini2, Daniela Marsili3, Pietro Comba3. 1. Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: roberto.pasetto@iss.it. 2. University of Turin, (Retired), Turin, Italy. 3. Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An estimate at the national level of the occupational cancer burden brought about by the industrial use of asbestos requires detailed routine information on such uses as well as on vital statistics of good quality. A causal association with asbestos exposure has been established for mesothelioma and cancers of the lung, larynx, and ovary. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to provide estimates of the occupational burden of asbestos-related cancer for the Latin American countries that are or have been the highest asbestos consumers in the region: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. METHODS: The burden of multifactorial cancers has been estimated through the approach suggested for the World Health Organization using the population attributable fraction. The following data were used: Proportion of workforce employed in each economic sector. Proportion of workers exposed to asbestos in each sector. Occupational turnover. Levels of exposure. Proportion of the population in the workforce. Relative risk for each considered disease for 1 or more levels of exposure. Data on the proportion of workers exposed to asbestos in each sector are not available for Latin American countries; therefore, data from the European CAREX database (carcinogen exposure database) were used. FINDINGS: Using mortality data of the World Health Organization Health Statistics database for the year 2009 and applying the estimated values for population attributable fractions, the number of estimated deaths in 5 years for mesothelioma and for lung, larynx, and ovary cancers attributable to occupational asbestos exposures, were respectively 735, 233, 29, and 14 for Argentina; 340, 611, 68, and 43 for Brazil; 255, 97, 14, and 9 for Colombia, and 1075, 219, 18, and 22 for Mexico. CONCLUSIONS: The limitations in compiling the estimates highlight the need for improvement in the quality of asbestos-related environmental and health data. Nevertheless, the figures are already usable to promote a ban on asbestos use.
BACKGROUND: An estimate at the national level of the occupational cancer burden brought about by the industrial use of asbestos requires detailed routine information on such uses as well as on vital statistics of good quality. A causal association with asbestos exposure has been established for mesothelioma and cancers of the lung, larynx, and ovary. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to provide estimates of the occupational burden of asbestos-related cancer for the Latin American countries that are or have been the highest asbestos consumers in the region: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. METHODS: The burden of multifactorial cancers has been estimated through the approach suggested for the World Health Organization using the population attributable fraction. The following data were used: Proportion of workforce employed in each economic sector. Proportion of workers exposed to asbestos in each sector. Occupational turnover. Levels of exposure. Proportion of the population in the workforce. Relative risk for each considered disease for 1 or more levels of exposure. Data on the proportion of workers exposed to asbestos in each sector are not available for Latin American countries; therefore, data from the European CAREX database (carcinogen exposure database) were used. FINDINGS: Using mortality data of the World Health Organization Health Statistics database for the year 2009 and applying the estimated values for population attributable fractions, the number of estimated deaths in 5 years for mesothelioma and for lung, larynx, and ovary cancers attributable to occupational asbestos exposures, were respectively 735, 233, 29, and 14 for Argentina; 340, 611, 68, and 43 for Brazil; 255, 97, 14, and 9 for Colombia, and 1075, 219, 18, and 22 for Mexico. CONCLUSIONS: The limitations in compiling the estimates highlight the need for improvement in the quality of asbestos-related environmental and health data. Nevertheless, the figures are already usable to promote a ban on asbestos use.
Authors: Matthew J Soeberg; Mai Anh Luong; Van Thuan Tran; Anh Thanh Tran; Thị Thu Huyen Nguyen; Dieu Bui; Thi Hoai Nga Nguyen; Ken Takahashi; Nico van Zandwijk Journal: Int J Occup Environ Health Date: 2016-07-08
Authors: S Jane Henley; Lucy A Peipins; Sun Hee Rim; Theodore C Larson; Jacqueline W Miller Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Lin Fritschi; Jayzii Chan; Sally J Hutchings; Tim R Driscoll; Adrian Y W Wong; Renee N Carey Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-05-11 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Daniela Marsili; Alessia Angelini; Caterina Bruno; Marisa Corfiati; Alessandro Marinaccio; Stefano Silvestri; Amerigo Zona; Pietro Comba Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Daniela Marsili; Benedetto Terracini; Vilma S Santana; Juan Pablo Ramos-Bonilla; Roberto Pasetto; Agata Mazzeo; Dana Loomis; Pietro Comba; Eduardo Algranti Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-05-12 Impact factor: 3.390