Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 370 (2019) 131–132

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/taap

High impact short article

Potential Problems with Determining Elongate Mineral Particle (EMP) T

Potency (Comments on article entitled, “A Comparison of Asbestos Fiber
Potency and Elongate Mineral Particle (EMP) Potency for Mesothelioma in
Humans”)
⁎
Jeffrey H. Mandela, , Nnaemeka U. Odob, Bruce H. Alexandera
a
University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Division of Environmental Health Sciences, Minneapolis, MN, United States of America
b
Exponent, Inc., Oakland, CA, United States of America

To the Editor: As an example, in taconite mining, determination of the RMeso by

We read with interest the article entitled, “A comparison of asbestos
fiber potency and elongate mineral particle (EMP) potency for me-
sothelioma in humans” by Garabrant and Pastula in the special issue of
‘Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology’ (vol. 361, December 15, 2018)
devoted to the Monticello Conference on elongate mineral articles.
A key controversy addressed in the conference was the issue of
pathogenicity of short (less than 5 μm in length) EMP. There was fairly
uniform agreement that short EMP do not present the same threat to
health as longer, thinner EMP, especially with regard to lung cancer.
Although this conclusion is not quite as clear for EMP exposure and
mesothelioma, the data suggest that short EMPs, as measured in taco-
nite, talc and gold mining operations, are similarly less mesothelio-
genic, if they are mesotheliogenic at all, because of increased clearance
(ATSDR, 2001). This conclusion has been reached in multiple epide-
miologic settings (Gamble and Gibbs, 2008; Mandel et al., 2016). It was
also a conclusion among conference participants (Gibbs et al., 2018).
The assessment by Garabrant and Pastula (2018) categorized EMP
potency for mesothelioma (R Meso) in a number of exposure settings
using the approach of Hodgson and Darnton (2000). They did this as-
sessment for both asbestiform and non-asbestiform EMP exposures,
updating many of the original studies considered by Hodgson and
Darnton (2000). However, in their summary, the estimated RMeso for
taconite exposure was comparable to that of the EMP of asbestiform
amosite.
Although Garabrant and Pastula do explain the potential limitations
of their approach, assessment of EMP potency for mesothelioma based
on epidemiologic and industrial hygiene data oversimplifies the po-
tential error largely having to do with the limited availability of his-
torical exposure data. In most cases, the time when fiber exposures of
all types were likely to have been the highest were also when exposure
assessments were rarely done. Typically, this accounts for the period of
time that precedes the regulatory era (pre-1970s) in the United States.
Garabrant and Pastula is limited by the use of industrial hygiene
monitoring data primarily from 2010 to 11. How this reflects past ex-
posure to either asbestiform and/or non-asbestiform EMP remains un-
certain. In addition, other potential exposures to asbestiform EMP from
commercial asbestos in miners could not be definitively assessed,
though anecdotal evidence from workers suggest that a substantial
exposure to asbestiform EMPs could have occurred.
These observations could explain the apparent discrepant finding of
a high RMeso for taconite mining EMPs, where the exposure used was
largely to less or non-mesotheliogenic, short EMPs. Practically no as-
bestiform EMPs were identified in any of the six active mining facilities
in the 2010–11 monitoring (Hwang et al., 2013).
Fiber potency estimates for mesothelioma are helpful if the appro-
priate exposure and existing toxicology data are considered. In the case
of taconite mining, by assigning the entire mesothelioma risk to re-
cently-measured, short EMP concentrations, without considering the
possibility of prior exposure to asbestiform EMPs or the known tox-
icology of short EMPS, critical information is omitted. With these facts
in mind, Garabrant and Pastula appear to have overestimated the po-
tency of short, taconite EMPs.
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2001. Toxicological Profile for
Asbestos. Available at. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles.
Gamble, J.F., Gibbs, G.W., 2008. An evaluation of the risks of lung cancer and me-
sothelioma from exposure to amphibole cleavage fragments. Regulatory Tox and
Pharmacology 52, S154–S186.
Garabrant, D.H., Pastula, S.T, 2018. A comparison of asbestos fiber potency and elongate
mineral particle (EMP) potency for mesothelioma in humans. The Monticello
Conference on Elongated Mineral Particles Special Issue. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
361, 127–136.
Gibbs, G.W., Berman, D.W., Hibbs, P., Lippmann, M., 2018. Session III: human exposure,
effects and risk. In: Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology (the Monticello
Conference on Elongated Mineral Particles Special Issue). vol. 361. pp. 145–148.

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mand0125@umn.edu (J.H. Mandel), nodo@exponent.com (N.U. Odo), balex@umn.edu (B.H. Alexander).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2019.03.002
Received 3 February 2019; Received in revised form 1 March 2019; Accepted 2 March 2019
Available online 07 March 2019
0041-008X/ © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
J.H. Mandel, et al. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 370 (2019) 131–132

Hodgson, J.T., Darnton, A., 2000. The quantitative risks of mesothelioma and lung cancer
Mandel, J.H., Alexander, B.H., Ramachandran, G., 2016. A review of mortality associated
in relation to asbestos exposure. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 14, 565–601. with elongate mineral particle (EMP) exposure in occupational epidemiology studies of
Hwang, J., Ramachandran, G., Raynor, P.C., Alexander, B.H., Mandel, J.H., 2013. gold, talc, and taconite mining. Am. J. Ind. Med. 59 (12), 1047–1060.
Comprehensive assessment of exposures to elongate mineral particles in the taconite
mining industry. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 57 (8), 966–978.

132