Exposure Estimates for Workers in a Facility Expanding Libby Vermiculite: Updated Values and Comparison With Original 1980 Values

The prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal): A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large number of individual experts. Evidence from human, animal and mechanistic data suggests that occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal dust) causes pneumoconiosis. In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust. These estimates of prevalences and levels will serve as input data for estimating (if feasible) the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years that are attributable to occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust among working-age (≥ 15 years) workers.

DATA SOURCES

We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA

We included working-age (≥ 15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (< 15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included all study types with objective dust or fibre measurements, published between 1960 and 2018, that directly or indirectly reported an estimate of the prevalence and/or level of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and/or coal dust.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, then data were extracted from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates by industrial sector (ISIC-4 2-digit level with additional merging within Mining, Manufacturing and Construction) using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and all available authors assessed the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight studies (82 cross-sectional studies and 6 longitudinal studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising > 2.4 million measurements covering 23 countries from all WHO regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, South-East Asia, Europe, and Western Pacific). The target population in all 88 included studies was from major ISCO groups 3 (Technicians and Associate Professionals), 6 (Skilled Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Workers), 7 (Craft and Related Trades Workers), 8 (Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers), and 9 (Elementary Occupations), hereafter called manual workers. Most studies were performed in Construction, Manufacturing and Mining. For occupational exposure to silica, 65 studies (61 cross-sectional studies and 4 longitudinal studies) were included with > 2.3 million measurements collected in 22 countries in all six WHO regions. For occupational exposure to asbestos, 18 studies (17 cross-sectional studies and 1 longitudinal) were included with > 20,000 measurements collected in eight countries in five WHO regions (no data for Africa). For occupational exposure to coal dust, eight studies (all cross-sectional) were included comprising > 100,000 samples in six countries in five WHO regions (no data for Eastern Mediterranean). Occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust was assessed with personal or stationary active filter sampling; for silica and asbestos, gravimetric assessment was followed by technical analysis. Risk of bias profiles varied between the bodies of evidence looking at asbestos, silica and coal dust, as well as between industrial sectors. However, risk of bias was generally highest for the domain of selection of participants into the studies. The largest bodies of evidence for silica related to the industrial sectors of Construction (ISIC 41-43), Manufacturing (ISIC 20, 23-25, 27, 31-32) and Mining (ISIC 05, 07, 08). For Construction, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.93, 17 studies, I2 91%, moderate quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91, 24 studies, I2 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. The pooled prevalence estimate for Mining was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, 20 studies, I2 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.04 mg/m3 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, 17 studies, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Crop and animal production (ISIC 01; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Professional, scientific and technical activities (ISIC 71, 74; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level). For asbestos, the pooled prevalence estimate for Construction (ISIC 41, 43, 45,) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.87, six studies, I2 99%, low quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing (ISIC 13, 23-24, 29-30), the pooled prevalence and level estimates were rated as being of very low quality of evidence. Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Other mining and quarrying (ISIC 08; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation (ISIC 37; very low quality of evidence for levels). For coal dust, the pooled prevalence estimate for Mining of coal and lignite (ISIC 05), was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00, six studies, I2 16%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.77 mg/m3 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.86, three studies, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). A small body of evidence was identified for Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35); with very low quality of evidence for prevalence, and the pooled level estimate being 0.60 mg/m3 (95% CI -6.95 to 8.14, one study, low quality of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we judged the bodies of evidence for occupational exposure to silica to vary by industrial sector between very low and moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and very low and low for level. For occupational exposure to asbestos, the bodies of evidence varied by industrial sector between very low and low quality of evidence for prevalence and were of very low quality of evidence for level. For occupational exposure to coal dust, the bodies of evidence were of very low or moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and low for level. None of the included studies were population-based studies (i.e., covered the entire workers' population in the industrial sector), which we judged to present serious concern for indirectness, except for occupational exposure to coal dust within the industrial sector of mining of coal and lignite. Selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica by industrial sector are considered suitable as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, and selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to asbestos and coal dust may perhaps also be suitable for estimation purposes. Protocol identifier: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.005. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084131.

Reconstructing historical exposures to elongate mineral particles (EMPs) in the taconite mining industry for 1955-2010

As part of ongoing epidemiological studies for assessing the association between exposure to dust from taconite operations and the development of respiratory diseases, the goal of this study was to reconstruct the exposures of workers to elongate mineral particle (EMP) in the Minnesota taconite mining industry from 1955-2010. Historical NIOSH-7400 and equivalent EMP personal exposure data were extracted from two sources: (1) the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) online database recorded for all inspection results since 1978 with 655 EMP monitoring records from 1978-2010 for 13 MSHA Mine IDs associated with this study; and (2) the mining companies' internal monitoring reports contained 96 personal EMP exposure records. NIOSH-7400 EMP personal exposures were measured for workers in different jobs in all active mines in 2010 by obtaining 1,285 personal samples. After data treatment, all data were grouped into seven mines and eight departments. Within each mine-department, the yearly EMP mean concentration in f/cc for each year of operation was predicted using two approaches. The performance of two approaches varied by situation. The assumptions underlying each approach described in this article have limitations. A linear regression based on limited historical measurements and those made in 2010-2011 (Approach 1) does not yield reasonable and plausible values of the slope. Approach 2 assumes that the EMP and the respirable dust in the same department share the same historical time trend. This approach allowed us to avail of the more reasonable slope estimates from the historical respirable dust data set and yielded more plausible historical exposure estimates for most locations. This work with two different job exposure matrix (JEMs) provides a unique research opportunity to study the potential impact of exposure assessment to epidemiological results. Both JEMs are being used to assess associations between EMP and respiratory disease in epidemiological studies.

Exposure-response modeling of non-cancer effects in humans exposed to Libby Amphibole Asbestos; update

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed a quantitative exposure-response model for the non-cancer effects of Libby Amphibole Asbestos (LAA) (EPA, 2014). The model is based on the prevalence of localized pleural thickening (LPT) in workers exposed to LAA at a workplace in Marysville, Ohio (Lockey et al., 1984; Rohs et al., 2008). Recently, Lockey et al. (2015a) published a follow-up study of surviving Marysville workers. The data from this study increases the number of cases of LPT and extends the observation period for a number of workers, thereby providing a strengthened data set to define and constrain the optimal exposure-response model for non-cancer effects from inhalation exposure to LAA. The new data were combined with the previous data to update the exposure-response modeling for LPT. The results indicate that a bivariate model using cumulative exposure and time since first exposure is appropriate, and the benchmark concentration is similar to the findings previously reported by EPA (2014). In addition, the data were also used to develop initial exposure-response models for diffuse pleural thickening (DPT) and small interstitial opacities (SIO).

Childhood exposure to Libby amphibole during outdoor activities

Residents of Libby, MT were exposed to amphibole asbestos through multiple environmental pathways. Previous exposure characterization has primarily relied on qualitative report of these exposure activities. The objectives of this study were to describe available data from the US EPA preremediation actions for Libby amphibole (LA) exposure in Libby, MT and develop an approach to characterize outdoor residential exposure to LA among children. Homes in Libby, MT included in the US EPA preremediation Contaminant Screening Survey (CSS) were categorized by the presence of interior and/or exterior visible vermiculite and concentrations of LA were measured in samples of dust and soil. Airborne exposure to LA while digging/gardening, raking, and mowing were estimated using US EPA activity-based sampling (ABS) results. Residential histories and frequency/duration of childhood activities were combined with ABS to demonstrate the approach for estimating potential exposure. A total of 3154 residential properties participated in the CSS and 44% of these had visible exterior vermiculite. Airborne concentrations of LA where there was visible vermiculite outdoors were 3-15 times higher during digging/gardening, raking, and mowing activities compared with homes without visible outdoor vermiculite. Digging and gardening activities represented the greatest contribution to estimated exposures and 73% of the participants reported this activity before the age of 6 years. This methodology demonstrated the use of historical preremediation data to estimate residential exposures of children for specific activities. Children younger than age 6 years may have been exposed to LA while digging/gardening, especially at homes where there is visible outdoor vermiculite. This approach may be extended to other activities and applied to the entire cohort to examine health outcomes.

Multiple pathway asbestos exposure assessment for a Superfund community

Libby, MT, USA, was the home to workers at a historical vermiculite mining facility and served as the processing and distribution center for this industrial product that was contaminated with amphibole asbestos. Several pathways of environmental asbestos exposure to the general population have been identified. The local clinic and health screening program collects data from participants on past occupational and environmental exposures to vermiculite and asbestos. Health studies among this population have demonstrated associations between amphibole exposure and health outcomes, but critical questions regarding the nature and level of exposure associated with specific outcomes remain unanswered. The objective of this study was to develop a comprehensive exposure assessment approach that integrates information on individuals' contact frequency with multiple exposure pathways. For 3031 participants, we describe cumulative exposure metrics for environmental exposures, occupational exposures, and residents' contact with carry-home asbestos from household workers. As expected, cumulative exposures for all three occupational categories were higher among men compared with women, and cumulative exposures for household contact and environmental pathways were higher among women. The comprehensive exposure assessment strategies will advance health studies and risk assessment approaches in this population with a complex history of both occupational and environmental asbestos exposure.

Low levels of exposure to libby amphibole asbestos and localized pleural thickening

OBJECTIVE

To explore the relationship between low levels of exposure to Libby amphibole asbestos (LAA) and pleural abnormalities, specifically localized pleural thickening (LPT).

METHODS

Three studies presenting the risks associated with quantitative LAA exposure estimates were reviewed, paying particular attention to lower exposure ranges.

RESULTS

Studies reviewed were conducted among workers exposed to LAA at mining and milling operations in Libby, Montana, at a vermiculite processing facility in Marysville, Ohio, and community residents exposed to LAA from a vermiculite processing facility in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Pleural abnormalities were evaluated using radiographs. Despite differences in study populations and design, each study found that cumulative inhalation LAA exposure was associated with increased risk of LPT even at low levels of exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhalation exposure to LAA is associated with increased risk of LPT even at the lowest levels of exposure in each study.