ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Public Health
Sec. Occupational Health and Safety
Volume 13 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1588415
This article is part of the Research TopicMineral Particles and Fibers and Human Health Risks: State-of-the-Art in Characterization, Analysis, Tissue Analytics, Exposure Thresholds for Risk, Epidemiology, and Risk Assessment for Science-Based Regulation and Disease Prevention and Implications for Occupational Health and SafetyView all 14 articles
Sex Differences in Asbestos Exposure
Provisionally accepted
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Although the association between exposure to asbestos and malignant mesothelioma has been established, occupational exposure has been historically present in males, while the ascertainment of female exposures is more nuanced. We reviewed the literature to assess differences in environmental exposure in mesothelioma cases according to sex. Methods: A new PubMed search was conducted with the key words "mesothelioma" and "environmental exposure" on October 11, 2024 with a start date of January 1, 2016, to supplement our previous qualitative review that included publications up through June 2016. Studies conducted in occupational settings were excluded.Results: Out of the 26 eligible papers, 11 were excluded because they did not report information on exposure by sex, leaving 15 published studies that were added to the 9 from our previous qualitative synthesis (24 total studies). 19 studies were cross-sectional, 2 were cohort and 3 were case control studies. The average NIH Study Quality tool score was 7.4/14 (minimum 3, maximum 12). Occupational exposure was more frequently observed in males than in females. While a male to female ratio favored males, there was variation in the strength of the association. There was a large proportion of cases with "unknown exposure," and these were more frequently observed among female cases. In some studies, up to 25% of female cases had unknown exposure profiles. Quality assessment showed a generalized lack of standardization in the definition of environmental exposures across studies. Conclusion: Although recent studies have continued to improve our understanding of environmental exposure to asbestos and other elongated fibers, challenges remain, including but not limited to lack of rigorous, high-quality evidence and difficulty standardizing definitions across countries and datasets to enable appropriate comparison across studies.
Keywords: Asbestos exposure, cancer risk, environmental risk, non-occupational exposure, Epidemiology
Received: 05 Mar 2025; Accepted: 09 May 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Patel, Tuminello and Taioli. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Emanuela Taioli, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.