Paul J Villeneuve1, David A Agnew, Kenneth C Johnson, Yang Mao. 1. Environmental Risk Assessment and Case Surveillance Division, Laboratory Centre for Disease Control, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0L2. pvillene@uottawa.ca
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between occupational exposure to magnetic fields and brain cancer in men was investigated using population-based case-control data collected in eight Canadian provinces. Emphasis was placed on examining the variations in risk across different histological types. METHODS: A list of occupations was compiled for 543 cases and 543 controls that were individually matched by age. Occupations were categorized according to their average magnetic field exposure through blinded expert review (<0.3, 0.3-<0.6, and > or = 0.6 microT). In total, 133 cases (14%) and 123 controls (12%) were estimated to have at least one occupation whereby magnetic field exposures exceeded 0.3 microT. Odds ratios (OR) were generated using conditional logistic regression, and were adjusted for suspected occupational risk factors for brain cancer. RESULTS: A non-significantly increased risk of brain cancer was observed among men who had ever held a job with an average magnetic field exposure >0.6 microT relative to those with exposures <0.3 microT (OR = 1.33, 95% CI : 0.75-2.36). A more pronounced risk was observed among men diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme (OR = 5.36, 95% CI : 1.16-24.78). Moreover, a cumulative time weighted index score of magnetic field exposure was significantly related to glioblastoma multiforme (P = 0.02). In contrast, magnetic field exposures were not associated with astrocytoma or other brain cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the hypothesis that occupational magnetic field exposure increases the risk of glioblastoma multiforme.
BACKGROUND: The relationship between occupational exposure to magnetic fields and brain cancer in men was investigated using population-based case-control data collected in eight Canadian provinces. Emphasis was placed on examining the variations in risk across different histological types. METHODS: A list of occupations was compiled for 543 cases and 543 controls that were individually matched by age. Occupations were categorized according to their average magnetic field exposure through blinded expert review (<0.3, 0.3-<0.6, and > or = 0.6 microT). In total, 133 cases (14%) and 123 controls (12%) were estimated to have at least one occupation whereby magnetic field exposures exceeded 0.3 microT. Odds ratios (OR) were generated using conditional logistic regression, and were adjusted for suspected occupational risk factors for brain cancer. RESULTS: A non-significantly increased risk of brain cancer was observed among men who had ever held a job with an average magnetic field exposure >0.6 microT relative to those with exposures <0.3 microT (OR = 1.33, 95% CI : 0.75-2.36). A more pronounced risk was observed among men diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme (OR = 5.36, 95% CI : 1.16-24.78). Moreover, a cumulative time weighted index score of magnetic field exposure was significantly related to glioblastoma multiforme (P = 0.02). In contrast, magnetic field exposures were not associated with astrocytoma or other brain cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the hypothesis that occupational magnetic field exposure increases the risk of glioblastoma multiforme.
Authors: Joseph B Coble; Mustafa Dosemeci; Patricia A Stewart; Aaron Blair; Joseph Bowman; Howard A Fine; William R Shapiro; Robert G Selker; Jay S Loeffler; Peter M Black; Martha S Linet; Peter D Inskip Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2009-02-20 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Quinn T Ostrom; Luc Bauchet; Faith G Davis; Isabelle Deltour; James L Fisher; Chelsea Eastman Langer; Melike Pekmezci; Judith A Schwartzbaum; Michelle C Turner; Kyle M Walsh; Margaret R Wrensch; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Avima M Ruder; Martha A Waters; Tania Carreón; Mary A Butler; Geoffrey M Calvert; Karen E Davis-King; Kathleen M Waters; Paul A Schulte; Jack S Mandel; Roscoe F Morton; Douglas J Reding; Kenneth D Rosenman Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Michelle C Turner; Geza Benke; Joseph D Bowman; Jordi Figuerola; Sarah Fleming; Martine Hours; Laurel Kincl; Daniel Krewski; Dave McLean; Marie-Elise Parent; Lesley Richardson; Siegal Sadetzki; Klaus Schlaefer; Brigitte Schlehofer; Joachim Schüz; Jack Siemiatycki; Martie van Tongeren; Elisabeth Cardis Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-06-16 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Kjell Hanson Mild; Mats-Olof Mattsso; Lennart Hardell; Joseph D Bowman; Michael Kundi Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Aude Lacourt; Elisabeth Cardis; Javier Pintos; Lesley Richardson; Laurel Kincl; Geza Benke; Sarah Fleming; Martine Hours; Daniel Krewski; Dave McLean; Marie-Elise Parent; Siegal Sadetzki; Klaus Schlaefer; Brigitte Schlehofer; Jerome Lavoue; Martie van Tongeren; Jack Siemiatycki Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 3.295
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