Biomarkers & Genetic Testing for Asbestos Disease
Table of Contents
The legal landscape surrounding asbestos-related disease claims is constantly evolving, particularly concerning the complex issue of causation. Recent legal developments, such as the Court of Appeal’s decision in Eton Holdings ltd [2023] EWCA CIV 1377, have clarified the application of the material contribution test for causation. This test now applies to both indivisible (like mesothelioma) and divisible (like asbestos-induced lung cancer) conditions. However, proving material contribution in cases of indivisible conditions, such as occupational cancers, presents meaningful challenges due to often unknown or speculative causal mechanisms.
To succeed in an asbestos-related claim, a claimant must establish two key elements of causation:
Generic Causation: This requires proving that the exposure to asbestos, resulting from a breach of duty, was capable of causing the specific injury.
Individual Causation: This necessitates demonstrating that the asbestos exposure in question actually made a contribution to the injury that was more than minimal.
In cancers where multiple potential causes exist, the ability to definitively link asbestos exposure as a contributing factor is crucial. This is where scientific advancements,particularly in the field of biomarkers,hold significant promise.
The Role of Biomarkers in Proving Causation
biomarkers are measurable indicators of a biological state or condition. In the context of asbestos-related cancers,the development of reliable biomarkers coudl revolutionize how causation is proven.
Identifying the Cause: Biomarkers could potentially identify specific asbestos fibres or their effects within the body, directly linking the disease to the exposure.
Quantifying Contribution: Future scientific developments may allow for the quantification of the contribution made by asbestos exposure, alongside other mutagens, to the development of the disease.
Mesothelioma and the Search for Definitive Links
The challenge of proving causation is particularly acute in mesothelioma cases. As Lord Rodger noted in Sienkiewicz, the Fairchild exception was established due to the limitations of current medical knowlege. The exception was designed to address situations where it was unachievable to pinpoint the specific fibre or fibres responsible for the malignant mutation. Lord Rodger’s observation highlights that if medical science could identify the precise source of the causative fibre, the need for such exceptions might diminish.
The potential for biomarkers to confirm the cause or the contribution of mutagens to disease development could significantly impact asbestos-related claims.
Implications for Defense and Future Claims
For defendants in asbestos litigation, the advent of reliable biomarkers could be a game-changer.It is not uncommon for claimants with mesothelioma to have de minimis or no easily identifiable source of asbestos exposure. In such scenarios,biomarkers could:
Assist in Defending Claims: By providing objective evidence,biomarkers could help to refute claims where exposure is uncertain or difficult to prove.
demonstrate Idiopathic Causes: Biomarkers might reveal option, non-asbestos-related causes for the disease, such as idiopathic (unknown origin) factors, thereby strengthening a defence.
While identifiable biomarkers for asbestos-related cancers are not yet widely available, the scientific community is making strides in this area. Developments in this field are being closely watched by legal professionals specializing in disease claims.
***
Clyde & Co are specialists in dealing with disease claims, and we closely monitor developments around asbestos diagnoses. For more on this subject, you can read all of our previous articles blank”>here and if you have any questions about this topic you can contact blank”>Barbara Goddard or any of our Occupational Disease and Legacy Claims team.