High-risk mesothelioma relation to meteorological and geological condition and distance from naturally occurring asbestos

16Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: Very few studies have investigated the incidence and risk of malignant mesothelioma (MM) associated with distinct sources of asbestos exposure, especially exposure to naturally occurring asbestos (NOA). Methods: Subjects were MM, lung, and breast cancer patients who were diagnosed and followed in Diyarbakir Province between 2008 and 2013. The birthplaces of patients were displayed on a geologic map. Geological and meteorological effects on MM were analyzed by logistic regression. Results: A total of 180 MM, 368 breast, and 406 lung cancer patients were included. The median distance from birthplace to ophiolites was 6.26 km for MM, 31.06 km for lung, and 34.31 km for breast cancer (p < 0.001). The majority of MM cases were seen within 20 km from NOA areas. The MM incidence inside of NOA was 1059/100.000, and out of NOA was 397/100.000; this difference was significant (p = 0.014). The largest concentration of MM residential areas was within ±30° (34 residential areas 36.6 %) of the dominant wind direction. Most MM patients were found in or near the dominant wind direction, especially in the acute angle defined by the dominant wind direction. MM incidence was directly proportional to {[area of NOA (km2)] * [cosine α of wind direction angle]} and was inversely proportional to the square of the distance (R = 0.291, p = 0.023). Conclusions: MM was higher near NOA and in the downwind direction. MM incidence and risk were affected by geological and meteorological factors.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abakay, A., Tanrikulu, A. C., Ayhan, M., Imamoglu, M. S., Taylan, M., Kaplan, M. A., & Abakay, O. (2016). High-risk mesothelioma relation to meteorological and geological condition and distance from naturally occurring asbestos. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 21(2), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12199-015-0501-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free