Can asbestos cause prostate cancer

[Startanew]

Hello haven't spoke on this site a long time I've got a Gleason score 9 I have advanced prostate and I've been on lupron for 12 months has anybody have any information on prostate cancer and asbestos exposure

[pjoshea13]

Rather that cite individual studies, here is a meta-analysis from January: -Patrick

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl... ... (full text)

***

"Results

A total of 17 independent studies were included for the analysis. The overall pooled SMR of PCa was 1.22, with a 95% CI of 1.13 to 1.32, with no heterogeneity across the studies (I2 = 18.8%, P = .234). Subgroup analysis shows that exposure to crocidolite, cement, studies conducted in Europe and Oceania, and long study follow-up (≥25 years) all contribute to significantly higher SMR, and we found no evidence of publication bias (Begg test P value = .592, Egger test P value = .874).

"Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggested that exposed to asbestos might be associated with an increased risk of PCa. High-exposure level of asbestos could contribute to significantly higher risk of PCa mortality.

***

"Discussion

Asbestos has been classified as the acknowledged carcinogen by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). There are adequate and strong epidemiological as well as other evidences supporting that occupational asbestos exposure results in an increased risk of lung cancer and mesothelioma.[32–34] However, whether asbestos is associated with the development of other cancers remains unknown.

During the past 10 years, a growing body of meta-analysis has been widely used in epidemiology to quantitatively assess the association between asbestos exposure and cancers via statistical method. Numerous cohort studies and systematic reviews attempted to answer the question between asbestos exposure and PCa, however, the results were debatable. In present study, we quantitatively assessed the relationship of excessive exposure to asbestos with PCa risk by applying a meta-analysis technique based on 17 independent kinds of literature.

Our results revealed an increased PCa risk among people exposed to asbestos. In another way, people exposed to asbestos have 1.22 times of suffering from PCa compared with the general population. The risk of PCa varied in people exposed to different type of asbestos. In subgroup analysis by asbestos type, we found a suggestive and significant association between asbestos type and the PCa in meta-SMR. Cohorts exposed to crocidolite and mixed asbestos showed larger SMRs than those exposed only to chrysotile asbestos, which is consistent with what Stayner et al[35] found for mesothelioma. In addition, the nonsignificant SMR based on the 4 cohorts with exposure to chrysotile asbestos only seems to confirm the results by Li et al,[36] which based on 3 studies. The exact mechanisms of asbestos exposure leading to PCa are not fully understood. The inherent characteristics of asbestos may affect its carcinogenicity, including fiber diameter and length, surface properties of the fiber as well as the fiber durability. Previous study has reported that the diameter of crocidolite fibers is the finest followed by chrysotile, amosite, and anthophyllite and it was considered the most harmful to human health.[8] In subgroup analysis by asbestos type, people exposed to crocidolite and mixed asbestos shows a significant association with PCa. Increased risk in PCa has also been associated with workers in a variety of dusty industries. The PCa SMR was significantly increased in the asbestos cement workers and the mixed workers (1.38 and 1.24 respectively), which is consistent with the majority of the mixed cohorts. Koskinen[22] identified a slightly increased risk of mortality from PCa in construction and shipyard cohort at Finland. Szeszenia D[29] also found excess mortality of PCas in the Foundries and Shipyards group. A cohort study[30] showed a significantly elevated risk of PCas in the constructions with residents who living in houses insulated with asbestos. Although the SMRs in the studies on chrysotile-exposed workers were generally higher in studies on other asbestos types, the effects of asbestos exposure in different geographical regions were not the same. Our meta-analysis mainly represented studies conducted in developed geographical areas, particularly among European populations, and 3 studies conducted in Oceania and 2 studies performed in developing countries such as China and Japan. Regrettably, there was only 1 study performed in US which may increase selection bias. As we can see, higher risk of PCa was observed in the subgroups of European as well as Oceania subgroups. Notably, the studies conducted in developing countries like China and Japan obtained a distinct higher SMR compared to those in Europe or Oceania, although without a statistic difference. The following reasons may account for this phenomenon:

1)

industries in developed countries have the economic capacity to provide a greater degree of occupational safety and workers may be more concerned with safety measures. It is therefore not surprising that fewer deaths occurred in these groups;

2)

the fiber concentrations in working environments were quite high in developing countries compared with those in developed countries.[37]

Results from subgroup analysis by follow-up period showed that higher risk of PCa was observed in follow-up period above 25 years, which seems to indirectly suggest a dose-response relation. Confounding and independent risk factors for PCas have been well addressed in majority studies. Studies have showed that cigarette smoking may play a harmful role in the initial development of PCa and that drinking alcohol may promote the process.[38–41]

Our meta-analysis has a number of limitations need to be taken into account when investigating the association between asbestos exposure and PCa which depend on the information contained in the analysis. First, available data in our study could not make us perform a further interaction and subgroup analysis such as alcohol and smoking habit or occupational exposure to other substances should have been discussed due to the limited data. Second, a further dose-response relationship of PCa with asbestos was not able to be performed from the available data. Moreover, personal interview using questionnaires[16] were more likely to be influenced by individual biases, leading to the deficiency of precision of report contents. Other unknown or unreported occupational hazards might overestimate the risk of asbestos exposure. Finally, some published studies regarding asbestos exposure failed to report PCas or only reported the results for SMRs of diseases but no CIs. These studies could be a potential matter.

In conclusion, this present meta-analysis found that exposure to asbestos is associated with an increased risk of PCa, especially among cement workers, and crocidolite is more harmful to human beings. Also, people living in houses insulated with asbestos are more likely to be suffering from PCas. Constant efforts should be made to further clarify the association of asbestos exposure with PCa.

[Startanew in reply to pjoshea13]

Thank you very much for that reply I appreciate all the research you've done into this subject as I being a welder for 45 years was exposed to asbestos and was curious if there was a link between asbestos and prostate cancer thank you for your reply again