ReviewInhalation toxicology2014
Perspectives on refractory ceramic fiber (RCF) carcinogenicity: comparisons with other fibers.
Review in Inhalation toxicology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Biomarkers for Pulmonary Inflammation and Fibrosis and Lung Ventilation Function in Chinese Occupational Refractory Ceramic Fibers-Exposed Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2011, SCOEL classified RCF as a secondary genotoxic carcinogen and supported a practical threshold. Inflammation was considered the predominant manifestation of RCF toxicity. Intrapleural and intraperitoneal implantation induced mesotheliomas and sarcomas in laboratory animals. Chronic nose-only inhalation bioassays indicated that RCF exposure in rats increased the incidence of lung cancer and similar exposures resulted in mesothelioma in hamsters, but these studies may have been compromised by overload. Epidemiological studies in the US and Europe showed an association between exposure and prevalence of respiratory symptoms and pleural plaques, but no interstitial fibrosis, mesotheliomas, or increased numbers of lung tumors were observed. As the latency of asbestos induced mesotheliomas can be up to 50 years, the relationship between RCF exposure and respiratory malignances has not been fully determined. Nonetheless, it is possible to offer useful perspectives. RCF and rock wool have similar airborne fiber dimensions and biopersistence. Therefore, it is likely that these fibers have similar toxicology. Traditional rock wool has been the subject of numerous cohort and case control studies. For rock wool, IARC (2002) concluded that the epidemiological studies did not provide evidence of carcinogenicity. Based on analogies with rock wool (read across), it is reasonable to believe that increases in lung cancer or any mesotheliomas are unlikely to be found in the RCF-exposed cohort. RCF producers have developed a product stewardship program to measure and control fiber concentrations and to further understand the health status of their workers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.