Share This:

Abstract for TR-246 - Chrysotile Asbestos (CASRN 12001-29-5)


Lifetime Carcinogenesis Studies of Chrysotile Asbestos (CAS No. 12001-29-5) in Syrian Golden Hamsters (Feed Studies)

Link to the full study report in PDF. If you have difficulty accessing the document, please send email to the NTP Webmaster [ Send Email ] and identify documents/pages for which access is required.  



Chemical Formula: H4Mg3O9Si2

Carcinogenesis studies of short range (SR), intermediate range (IR), or intermediate range chrysotile asbestos in combination with the intestinal carcinogen 1,2-dimethylhydrazine dihydrochloride (DMH) were conducted with male and female Syrian golden hamsters. Both forms of chrysotile asbestos were administered at the concentration of 1% in pelleted diet for the entire lifetime of the hamsters starting with mothers of the test animals. Group sizes varied from 125 to 253. Starting at 6 weeks of age, male and female hamsters in the intermediate range chrysotile/DMH study were given oral doses of DMH (4 mg/kg) every other week for a total of 5 doses. There was no adverse effect on body weight gain or survival by either form of asbestos or by asbestos in combination with DMH.

A significant increase (P<0.05) in adrenal cortical adenomas was observed in male hamsters exposed to SR and IR chrysotile asbestos and in females treated with IR chrysotile asbestos when compared to the pooled control groups (males: pooled controls, 25/466, 5%; SR chrysotile, 26/299, 11%; IR chrysotile, 24/244, 10%; females: pooled controls, 15/468, 3%; IR chrysotile, 18/234, 8%). However, statistical significance was lost when these dosed groups were compared with concurrent control groups (males: SR control, 7/115, 6%; IR control, 7/115, 6%; females: SR control, 4/112, 4%; IR control, 6/118, 5%).

The results of the combination study (IR chrysotile plus DMH) did not yield a significant increase in tumors above the background level observed in the DMH group alone or in the untreated control group. The DMH failed to yield a background level of intestinal tumors high enough to provide a valid test of the cocarcinogenic potential of chrysotile asbestos. For this reason, the cocarcinogenic potential of orally administered asbestos should be considered untested.

Under the conditions of these studies, neither short range chrysotile nor intermediate range chrysotile asbestos was carcinogenic when ingested at 1% levels in the diet by male and female Syrian golden hamsters. While there were increases in the rates of adrenal cortical adenomas in male and female hamsters exposed to intermediate range chrysotile asbestos compared to the pooled groups, these incidence rates were not different when compared with the concurrent control groups. Additionally, the biologic importance of adrenal tumors in the absence of target organ (gastrointestinal tract) neoplasia is questionable. The cocarcinogenesis studies using IR chrysotile asbestos and 1,2-dimethylhydrazine dihydrochloride were considered inadequate because there was no increase in intestinal neoplasia in the DMH group.



Levels of Evidence of Carcinogenicity:

Intermediate Range:
Sex Species Results
Male Hamsters: Negative
Female Hamsters: Negative
Intermediate Range + dimethyl hydrazine:
Sex Species Results
Male Hamsters: Inadequate
Female Hamsters: Inadequate
Short Range:
Sex Species Results
Male Hamsters: Negative
Female Hamsters: Negative

Note: Chrysotile Asbestos was also tested in F344 rats administered in feed (See TR-295, reported 1985).

Report Date: July 1990

Target Organs & Incidences from 2-year Studies

Return to Long Term Abstracts