Used by every military branch in the United States, over 300 products containing asbestos were used by the Navy and other military sectors from the 1930s through the 1970s. Products containing asbestos were utilized due to its fire and heat resistant qualities. The mineral frequently appeared as insulation for ships, aircraft, vehicles and buildings.

Shipyard workers, sailors and tradesman aboard these ships were wrongfully exposed aboard navigation rooms, sleeping quarters and mess halls.  Asbestos was so valued that its use was not phased out by the military until the 1970s.

In 1983, the Navy Asbestos Control Program was created to help facilitate compliance with asbestos-related regulations set by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Despite these actions, many veterans continued to be exposed to high levels of asbestos even after the Navy began to replace contaminated ships.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, officials discovered that the number of deaths relating to asbestos exposure steadily increased between 1999 and 2005. Approximately 30 percent of those diagnosed with mesothelioma are veterans.

Mesothelioma and asbestosis are rare illnesses caused almost exclusively by asbestos exposure. Approximately 2,000 to 3,000 new mesothelioma cases are reported every year in the United States alone, while 10,000 are reported worldwide. Mesothelioma develops in the mesothelium, the thin layer of tissue that lines the area around the heart, chest cavity and the abdominal cavity, as well as the outer surface of most organs. Due to the fact many symptoms of mesothelioma mimic those of less serious conditions; diagnosis of mesothelioma is a difficult task.

Although mesothelioma is an aggressive disease, many veterans have found themselves living a long life, even with the illness. Those who served decades ago are beginning to demonstrate symptoms of asbestos-related illnesses, which can take anywhere from 20 to 50 years to develop.

For more information on veteran asbestos exposure and mesothelioma, please visit the Mesothelioma Center.

Because pulmonary adenocarcinoma, malignant mesothelioma and benign mesothelioma have great resemblance to one another under a microscope, medical professionals involved in the diagnosis of mesothelioma can experience difficulty in differentiating between the three conditions. This challenge has motivated mesothelioma researchers to search for better diagnostic methods, including discovering biological markers that can easily be tested in a lab setting.

The biological marker D2-40 is an antibody produced by the immune system. It is already in use as a marker for lymphatic endothelium (a type of lymphatic tissue that lines body cavities and certain organs). Researchers have theorized that D2-40 could be particularly beneficial in diagnosing epithelial mesotheliomas from pulmonary adenocarcinomas.

There are three different “histological” types of mesothelioma, including epithelial (the most common type), biphasic and sarcomatoid. Histology is the microscopic study of cell shape, structure and pattern of formation (whether it is round, oblong and so on). A branch of histology, known as immunohistochemistry, uses chemical staining of cell samples under a microscope to identify proteins of the immune system that indicate the presence of disease.

Hence, the fields of histopathology and immunohistochemistry help diagnose malignant mesothelioma and much research is being conducted in these fields to improve diagnosis, treatment and prognosis for mesothelioma patients. In a separate study, another researcher found D2-40 to be present in 86 percent of the epithelial mesotheliomas tested, and additionally in four out of five tested biphasic mesotheliomas (which are a mix of epithelial and sarcomatoid cells). The researcher also found that D2-40 was not present in sarcomatoid mesotheliomas, further supporting the efficacy of D2-40 as a marker for epithelial mesothelioma.

In the Turkish study researchers found D2-40 to be present in 64.3 percent of epithelial mesotheliomas tested. Only one out of the seven biphasic mesotheliomas tested was positive for D2-40. Additionally, the researchers found no statistical difference in malignant mesotheliomas versus benign mesotheliomas, suggesting that D2-40 would not be a good biological marker to differentiate between malignant and benign mesothelioma.

The results were gratifying to researchers, stating, “In conclusion, strong membranous D2-40 positivity is helpful in differentiation of MM [malignant mesothelioma] from pleural involvement of pulmonary adenocarcinoma, so we suggest that it should be included in the IHC [immunohistochemical] panel used for this purpose.”

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

This is the second suit he has filed. In a previous suit issued against the companies, Savoy claimed a different asbestos-related injury in contrast to his most recent complaint.

Savoy believes he was exposed to asbestos-containing products while working as a carpenter. He also stated in the lawsuit that the companies negligently continued to manufacture asbestos-containing products where he worked even after knowing the hazards associated with asbestos.

Exposure to asbestos has been linked to several serious illnesses, including lung cancer, asbestosis and malignant mesothelioma. The latter can be particularly harmful because most patients unknowingly develop the cancer. Symptoms of mesothelioma may take as long as 50 years to arise, and by then the malignant tumors have already reached the advanced stages of development.

Treating an asbestos-related disease can be extremely difficult for doctors if not diagnosed during the early stages of development. Most treatment methods only offer palliative care and are not aimed at curing the disease.

According to the suit, Savoy claims the companies failed to test the asbestos-laden products before introducing them into the stream of commerce. He also says the companies were negligent for failing to notify him about the dangers of asbestos in a timely manner.

Savoy states he has experienced physical pain, mental anguish, lost wages, medical costs, loss of earning capacity, and sustained disfigurement and physical impairment.

In the lawsuit that was filed on Nov. 5, 2009, Savoy is seeking unspecified actual and exemplary damages, plus costs, pre- and post-judgment interest and other relief the Court deems appropriate.

Thousands of lawsuits similar to Savoy’s have been filed against companies who conspired to hide information pertaining to the hazards of asbestos. Those experiencing symptoms of an asbestos-related disease, which may include shortness of breath, chest pain, persistent cough and abdominal pain, should be checked for signs of asbestos exposure by a qualified doctor.

Additional information about mesothelioma and asbestos exposure may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

The test, which analyzes relative expression levels of four genes involved in malignant mesothelioma, has shown in multiple studies to be effective at foretelling postsurgical outcome in pleural mesothelioma patients. The researchers were motivated to develop a molecular test that could predict surgical outcome because current staging methods and other means of assessing prognosis are insufficient at determining which mesothelioma patients will benefit from surgery or trimodality therapy.

The report states that “Trimodality treatment consisting of surgical resection with chemotherapy and radiation leads to longer survival than nonsurgical therapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).” However, this aggressive approach is only beneficial to about 50 percent of MPM patients and involves high medical costs and side effects. With only half of patients benefitting from this aggressive treatment approach, there is clearly a need for a way to determine which individuals will see an improved prognosis.

The current median survival of patients that undergo the aggressive trimodality therapy is one to two years, but approximately 20 percent of patients may be disease-free for three to 15 years. Considering the potential of improving survival so significantly, taking an aggressive treatment approach is certainly warranted among the patients who may be more genetically apt to benefit. This further supports the need for an accurate test to asses which patients should take on the medical costs and side effects of aggressive treatment.

The researchers sought to develop a predictive and clinically useful test based on the expression of a small number of genes. They also sought to create an easy-to-use test, stating, “The principle utility of this test, in contrast to many proposed predictive tests in cancer, is that it does not depend on highly specific instrumentation and the test can be performed in any laboratory and still deliver a consistent, reproducible result.”

Additionally, standard biopsy procedures used to diagnose mesothelioma already obtain adequate tissue samples for the gene ratio test. This means no additional invasive procedures must be performed for the gene ratio analysis.

The results of the study moved researchers to propose this test become a standard practice in diagnosing and planning treatment for pleural mesothelioma patients. The researchers concluded, “Our successful application of this test indicates that it can be performed on specimens obtained in a minimally invasive biopsy performed before major surgical intervention, can accurately predict postsurgical outcome, and can reliably inform the clinical decision of whether to perform major surgical or trimodal therapies.”

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

Throughout the past seven years, Dr. Malcolm Feigen, a radiation oncologist, has been developing new mesothelioma treatment methods involving higher-than-normal doses of radiotherapy. A total of 13 patients were included in the pilot program used to test the treatment.

Dr. Feigen credits the facility’s ability to increase the dose of radiation to new technologies and better equipment. The result of the pilot program was evaluated by using PET scans before patients underwent radiotherapy and after the treatment was finished.

Dr. Feigen said, “We’ve been very impressed that in most cases there’s a considerable improvement in the activity of the tumor masses that we’ve given high doses of radiotherapy. And most patients have got through the course of treatment with no major side effects and some have had long-term benefits.”

Most of the patients in the pilot program have undergone surgery before receiving radiotherapy. On average, the treatment has given patients an additional two years to live.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer that often leaves patients with a very poor prognosis after they’ve been diagnosed. Throughout the past five years, statistics show the average length of survival is 10 to 11 months after diagnosis.

For most patients, chemotherapy treatment methods only provide short-term benefits before the pain or cancer redevelops. Dr. Feigen says when radiotherapy is used, the cancer does not come back in the same place. If it is detected in another area, early notification can provide doctors the opportunity to stop the cancer from further development.

“Some patients go on to have a number of good years before sometimes the tumor comes back in areas that we haven’t been able to give radiotherapy to,” Dr. Feigen said. “Some have had chemotherapy before they see us or afterwards and that does provide an additional benefit, but not always, and we think that most of the symptoms are relieved more effectively by high doses of radiotherapy than these other alternatives.”

At a national oncology conference taking place next week, Dr. Feigen will present the facility’s findings, which will hopefully encourage other researchers to get involved. Professor Ian Olver, the CEO of the Cancer Council of Australia, believes the Austin Health Centre’s findings are promising and encourages additional studies.

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

Caused almost exclusively by asbestos exposure, peritoneal mesothelioma is an extremely rare cancer that is very resistant to most cancer treatments. The disease exhibits a long latency period of 20 to 50 years after the initial exposure to asbestos, which can complicate both the diagnostic and treatment process. Affecting the lining of the abdomen, symptoms typically include abdominal pain or swelling, change in bowel habits, weight loss, nausea, fatigue and development of lumps under the skin around the abdomen.

Of the 2,000 to 3,000 cases of malignant mesothelioma diagnosed annually, peritoneal mesothelioma accounts for 10 to 20 percent. Because more than 75 percent of mesothelioma cases are pleural in origin (starting in the lungs), the majority of mesothelioma clinical trials involve pleural patients and not peritoneal patients. As such, any study on peritoneal mesothelioma is of great importance since it can be difficult to attain funding to research such a rare condition.

In this study, British researchers analyzed clinicopathological features, operative procedures, early outcomes and survival rates among 17 patients who underwent surgery for peritoneal mesothelioma followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Upon analyzing the results, the researchers found that “Cytoreductive surgery combined with intraperitoneal chemotherapy appears to be the optimal treatment for selected patients with peritoneal mesothelioma.” The researchers also noted that “Increased familiarity with this condition’s presentation and natural history, and knowledge of available treatment options, will hopefully facilitate treatment of these patients.”

Current treatment options for peritoneal mesothelioma patients include surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Treatment with any one therapy has not improved survival rates, but combining therapies have appeared to improve survival rates in select patients.

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

Sirolimus, which is also known as rapamycin, is an immunosuppressant drug traditionally used to prevent rejection of organ transplantations (especially used in kidney transplants). Because of its anti-proliferative effects, sirolimus is currently being investigated as a potential treatment option in a number of cancers, including malignant mesothelioma.

Mesothelioma is a cancer caused almost exclusively by asbestos exposure. The disease exhibits a long latency period of 20 to 50 years after initial exposure to asbestos. This long latency period can make the cancer both difficult to diagnosis and to treat. Currently there is no cure for mesothelioma, but a number of treatment options are available to reduce pain and increase quality of life.

The immunosuppressant drug sirolimus is a well-established inhibitor of “mammalian target of rapamycin” (mTOR), which is a protein that affects cell growth, cell proliferation, cell survival and mortality, protein synthesis and more. Scientists believe mTOR contributes to the aggressiveness of mesothelioma cancer, thus suppressing mTOR could potentially make the cancer easier to treat.

The researchers “sought to determine whether combination treatment with sirolimus and cisplatin would enhance cell death in malignant pleural mesothelioma.” In the study, individual malignant pleural mesothelioma cell lines (samples) were incubated with sirolimus or cisplatin alone, or in combination, and the results were analyzed.

Upon observation of the results, the researchers found that “Sirolimus appears to enhance the cytotoxicity of cisplatin in malignant pleural mesothelioma cell lines through the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway. These results provide a basis for the clinical evaluation of combined sirolimus and cisplatin chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma.”

Across the globe studies such as this one are being conducted with hopes of finding a cure for this aggressive disease. These clinical trials and research studies are making advancements in the treatment of mesothelioma, and a number of patients volunteer for such studies to receive the latest in treatment options.

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

Roger Neely, Ruby Neely’s son, filed the suit in Tennessee alleging his mother’s cancer was caused by asbestos fibers carried home on his father’s work clothes while employed at a nearby DuPont plant.

Roger Neely’s father, Lively Neely, worked at the DuPont plant in Old Hickory, Tennessee for 20 years. During his employment, he unknowingly exposed his wife and himself to asbestos fibers. Lively Neely actually reached a settlement with DuPont during the 1980s before passing from an asbestos-related illness. He worked with asbestos insulation and around asbestos-laden equipment while at DuPont.

Asbestos was used in a wide variety of manufacturing applications throughout the 20th century. While DuPont never manufactured asbestos-containing products, much of their equipment was insulated with asbestos.

In previous mesothelioma cases, company documents have shown that DuPont’s upper management was aware of the hazards associated with asbestos, but failed to notify employees. As a result, numerous lawsuits similar to Roger Neely’s have been filed against the company.

The Neely lawsuit claims DuPont failed to warn employees that asbestos could potentially be carried home on their skin and clothes. This form of asbestos exposure is known as secondhand exposure, which has affected thousands of families with relatives who worked with asbestos.

DuPont is currently the world’s fourth largest chemical company in terms of revenue. The company has expanded considerably and is now involved in the development of synthetic polymers such as nylon and Teflon.

Exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of mesothelioma cancer. For most patients, prognosis is poor as mesothelioma doctors often experience difficulty in treating the disease. Treatment options usually include palliative methods aimed at relieving pain for the patient.

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

Both CT (computed tomography) and PET (positron emission tomography) scans are helpful in diagnosing and staging malignant mesothelioma, and they can also provide detailed images and accurate target volume delineation (depiction of the tumor’s volume) to improve the application and effectiveness of radiation therapy.

The researchers explained, “When combined with adequate tumoricial [anticancer] doses, accurate target volume delineation remains to be one of the most important predictive factors for radiotherapy (RT) success in locally advanced or medically inoperable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients.”

With the goal of improving their understanding of accurate target volume delineation, the researchers sought to compare regular CT scans with co-registered PET-CT scans, which are a fusion of both PET and CT images. The co-registered PET-CT scans produce a more detailed image and thus a better understanding of the tumor, which improves the approach and effect of radiation therapy.

Researchers concluded, “This study demonstrated the usefulness of PET-CT-based target volume delineation in patients with MPM. Co-registration of PET and CT information reduces the likelihood of geographic misses, and additionally, significant reductions observed in target volumes may potentially allow escalation of RT dose beyond conventional limits.”

The study showed that radiation therapy may be improved with the use of co-registered PET-CT scans that produce more accurate target volume depictions. Researchers discovered promising results in this study and feel future research in this treatment approach is warranted.

Thankfully, mesothelioma research studies like this clinical trial are being conducted throughout the globe and these studies help improve prognosis for mesothelioma patients worldwide.

Additional information about mesothelioma may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.

On November 16, that money will also be used to start screening community residents for potential asbestos-related issues, including those related to asbestosis, lung cancer and malignant mesothelioma.

Montana Senator Max Baucus said, “Help has arrived on the ground for folks in Libby who are victims of asbestos-related disease. It’s imperative that people exposed to vermiculite asbestos get screened to identify any asbestos-related disease. If diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease, Libby residents deserve to get the very best treatment possible.”

Approximately 400 Libby residents have passed away from an illness related to asbestos exposure. According to the HHS, about 500 people out of the 3,900 that currently live in Libby and the nearby town Troy experience asbestos-related problems.

Statistics also reveal that about 50 new medical cases related to asbestos are reported each year and nearly 2,000 Libby residents have been affected since the official closing of W.R. Grace and Company’s asbestos-contaminated vermiculite mine in 1990.

Workers from the mine (most being Libby residents) not only exposed themselves, but family members as well by carrying home asbestos fibers on their work clothes. Other locations throughout Libby were contaminated with asbestos-laden soil from the mine, including fields, roads, playgrounds and gardens.

Exposure to asbestos can occur by either inhaling or ingesting asbestos fibers. If asbestos is disturbed, the microscopic fibers often remain airborne for long periods of time, increasing the risk of exposure. The EPA says there is no safe level of asbestos exposure.

The $6 million health care grant is being administered by the Lincoln County Health Department and other health care providers. Information about the health services available can be found on the Web site www.libbyasbestos.org.

According to Baucus, “These services are a result of a long fight to get Libby residents the resources they need to move forward towards a bright future.”

Additional information about mesothelioma and asbestos exposure may be found through the Mesothelioma Center.