Literature DB >> 11170121

A meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies of electric and magnetic fields and breast cancer in women and men.

T C Erren1.   

Abstract

This paper reviews 43 publications that provide information about possible associations between exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF) at work or at home and risks of breast cancer in women and men. Estimation of relative risk associated with exposure was possible for 24 studies among women and 15 among men. The data are grouped in relation to gender of study subjects, type of study, geographical location, and method used to assess exposure, with corresponding precision-weighted estimates of pooled relative risks (RRs). The chi(2) statistics are used to assess the degree to which differences between studies, within subgroups, may be attributable simply to sampling variability. The pooled RR from studies in women was 1.12 (95% CI: 1.09, 1.15), but variations between the contributing results are not easily attributable to chance (P = 0.0365). A fairly homogeneous increased risk was found for men (a pooled RR of 1.37, with 95% confidence limits of 1.11, 1.71, and homogeneity P-value = 0.1101). However, in both genders, results from individual studies are very variable and in part contradictory. The paramount methodological problem inhibiting valid conclusions about an association between EMF and breast cancer is the probable misclassification of exposure and the possible misclassification of the disease itself. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11170121     DOI: 10.1002/1521-186x(2001)22:5+<::aid-bem1027>3.3.co;2-s

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioelectromagnetics        ISSN: 0197-8462            Impact factor:   2.010


  8 in total

Review 1.  Light, timing of biological rhythms, and chronodisruption in man.

Authors:  Thomas C Erren; Russel J Reiter; Claus Piekarski
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2003-10-14

2.  Occupation and breast cancer risk among Shanghai women in a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Bu-Tian Ji; Aaron Blair; Xiao-Ou Shu; Wong-Ho Chow; Michael Hauptmann; Mustafa Dosemeci; Gong Yang; Jay Lubin; Yu-Tang Gao; Nathaniel Rothman; Wei Zheng
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.214

3.  Occupational exposure to magnetic fields and breast cancer among women textile workers in Shanghai, China.

Authors:  Wenjin Li; Roberta M Ray; David B Thomas; Michael Yost; Scott Davis; Norman Breslow; Dao Li Gao; E Dawn Fitzgibbons; Janice E Camp; Eva Wong; Karen J Wernli; Harvey Checkoway
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-09-15       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Occupational exposure and risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Concettina Fenga
Journal:  Biomed Rep       Date:  2016-01-21

5.  Prospective evaluation of risk factors for male breast cancer.

Authors:  Louise A Brinton; Douglas A Richesson; Gretchen L Gierach; James V Lacey; Yikyung Park; Albert R Hollenbeck; Arthur Schatzkin
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-10-07       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  [Breast cancer in men: about 6 cases].

Authors:  Kamilia Laabadi; Sofia Jayi; Fatimazohra Fdili Alaoui; Hakima Bouguern; Hikmat Chaara; My Abdelilah Melhouf; Karim Ibn Majdoub Hassani; Said Ait Laalim; Hicham Anoun; Imane Toughrai; Khalid Mazaz
Journal:  Pan Afr Med J       Date:  2013-10-28

7.  A meta-analysis on the relationship between exposure to ELF-EMFs and the risk of female breast cancer.

Authors:  Qingsong Chen; Li Lang; Wenzhe Wu; Guoyong Xu; Xiao Zhang; Tao Li; Hanlin Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Occupational exposure to magnetic fields and breast cancer among Canadian men.

Authors:  Anne Grundy; Shelley A Harris; Paul A Demers; Kenneth C Johnson; David A Agnew; Paul J Villeneuve
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 4.452

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.