Commentary on pathologic diagnosis of asbestosis and critique of the 2010 Asbestosis Committee of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and Pulmonary Pathology Society's (PPS) update on the diagnostic criteria for pathologic asbestosis.

Abstract

We reviewed the 2010 Asbestosis Committee's update on the diagnostic criteria for pathologic asbestosis. We must respectfully disagree with many of the criteria set forth therein, especially for recognizing asbestosis at its earliest stages; with statements focusing on the number of asbestos bodies needed in order to make a pathologic diagnosis of asbestosis; and regarding the benefits and pitfalls of relying on fiber analysis for diagnostic purposes, especially where chrysotile asbestos is concerned, including the methodology used for fiber determination. This critique has become even more relevant with the 2014 Helsinki criteria publication, which adopted the 2010 CAP/PPS criteria. Based on our review of these newer criteria and our experience in this field, we find that the CAP-NIOSH 1982 criteria is still the most acceptable method for the pathologic diagnosis and grading of asbestosis, which can be described as pulmonary fibrosis caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers.