Amelia K Wesselink1, Tanran R Wang1, Matthias Ketzel2,3, Ellen M Mikkelsen4, Jørgen Brandt2,5, Jibran Khan2,6, Ole Hertel7, Anne Sofie D Laursen4, Benjamin R Johannesen4, Mary D Willis1,8, Jonathan I Levy9, Kenneth J Rothman1,10, Henrik T Sørensen1,4, Lauren A Wise1, Elizabeth E Hatch1. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Department of Environmental Science, Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark. 3. Global Centre for Clean Air Research (GCARE), University of Surrey, Guildford, UK. 4. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 5. iClimate, interdisciplinary Centre for Climate Change, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Danish Big Data Centre for Environment and Health (BERTHA), Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark. 7. Department of Ecoscience, Aarhus University, Denmark. 8. School of Biological and Population Health Sciences, College of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 9. Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 10. Research Triangle Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Animal and epidemiologic studies indicate that air pollution may adversely affect fertility. Epidemiologic studies have been restricted largely to couples undergoing fertility treatment or have retrospectively ascertained time-to-pregnancy among pregnant women. OBJECTIVES: We examined the association between residential ambient air pollution and fecundability, the per-cycle probability of conception, in a large preconception cohort of Danish pregnancy planners. METHODS: During 2007-2018, we used the Internet to recruit and follow women who were trying to conceive without the use of fertility treatment. Participants completed an online baseline questionnaire eliciting socio-demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, and medical and reproductive histories and follow-up questionnaires every 8 weeks to ascertain pregnancy status. We determined concentrations of ambient nitrogen oxides (NOx ), nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3 ), particulate matter <2.5 µm (PM2.5 ) and <10 µm (PM10 ), and sulphur dioxide (SO2 ) at each participant's residential address. We calculated average exposure during the year before baseline, during each menstrual cycle over follow-up and during the entire pregnancy attempt time. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for potential confounders and co-pollutants. The analysis was restricted to the 10,183 participants who were trying to conceive for <12 cycles at study entry whose addresses could be geocoded. RESULTS: During 12 months of follow-up, 73% of participants conceived. Higher concentrations of PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with small reductions in fecundability. For example, the FRs for a one interquartile range (IQR) increase in PM2.5 (IQR = 3.2 µg/m3 ) and PM10 (IQR = 5.3 µg/m3 ) during each menstrual cycle were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.99) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.99), respectively. Other air pollutants were not appreciably associated with fecundability. CONCLUSIONS: In this preconception cohort study of Danish women, residential exposures to PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with reduced fecundability.
BACKGROUND: Animal and epidemiologic studies indicate that air pollution may adversely affect fertility. Epidemiologic studies have been restricted largely to couples undergoing fertility treatment or have retrospectively ascertained time-to-pregnancy among pregnant women. OBJECTIVES: We examined the association between residential ambient air pollution and fecundability, the per-cycle probability of conception, in a large preconception cohort of Danish pregnancy planners. METHODS: During 2007-2018, we used the Internet to recruit and follow women who were trying to conceive without the use of fertility treatment. Participants completed an online baseline questionnaire eliciting socio-demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, and medical and reproductive histories and follow-up questionnaires every 8 weeks to ascertain pregnancy status. We determined concentrations of ambient nitrogen oxides (NOx ), nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3 ), particulate matter <2.5 µm (PM2.5 ) and <10 µm (PM10 ), and sulphur dioxide (SO2 ) at each participant's residential address. We calculated average exposure during the year before baseline, during each menstrual cycle over follow-up and during the entire pregnancy attempt time. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for potential confounders and co-pollutants. The analysis was restricted to the 10,183 participants who were trying to conceive for <12 cycles at study entry whose addresses could be geocoded. RESULTS: During 12 months of follow-up, 73% of participants conceived. Higher concentrations of PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with small reductions in fecundability. For example, the FRs for a one interquartile range (IQR) increase in PM2.5 (IQR = 3.2 µg/m3 ) and PM10 (IQR = 5.3 µg/m3 ) during each menstrual cycle were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.99) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.99), respectively. Other air pollutants were not appreciably associated with fecundability. CONCLUSIONS: In this preconception cohort study of Danish women, residential exposures to PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with reduced fecundability.
Authors: Robert D Brook; Barry Franklin; Wayne Cascio; Yuling Hong; George Howard; Michael Lipsett; Russell Luepker; Murray Mittleman; Jonathan Samet; Sidney C Smith; Ira Tager Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-06-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ellen M Mikkelsen; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise; Kenneth J Rothman; Anders Riis; Henrik Toft Sørensen Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2008-09-09 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Krista F Huybrechts; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Tina Christensen; Anders H Riis; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Kenneth J Rothman Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2010-02-11 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: S Mahalingaiah; J E Hart; F Laden; L V Farland; M M Hewlett; J Chavarro; A Aschengrau; S A Missmer Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2016-01-02 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Marie E Thoma; Alexander C McLain; Jean Fredo Louis; Rosalind B King; Ann C Trumble; Rajeshwari Sundaram; Germaine M Buck Louis Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Michael Brauer; Barbara Casadei; Robert A Harrington; Richard Kovacs; Karen Sliwa Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Cong Liu; Renjie Chen; Francesco Sera; Ana M Vicedo-Cabrera; Yuming Guo; Shilu Tong; Micheline S Z S Coelho; Paulo H N Saldiva; Eric Lavigne; Patricia Matus; Nicolas Valdes Ortega; Samuel Osorio Garcia; Mathilde Pascal; Massimo Stafoggia; Matteo Scortichini; Masahiro Hashizume; Yasushi Honda; Magali Hurtado-Díaz; Julio Cruz; Baltazar Nunes; João P Teixeira; Ho Kim; Aurelio Tobias; Carmen Íñiguez; Bertil Forsberg; Christofer Åström; Martina S Ragettli; Yue-Leon Guo; Bing-Yu Chen; Michelle L Bell; Caradee Y Wright; Noah Scovronick; Rebecca M Garland; Ai Milojevic; Jan Kyselý; Aleš Urban; Hans Orru; Ene Indermitte; Jouni J K Jaakkola; Niilo R I Ryti; Klea Katsouyanni; Antonis Analitis; Antonella Zanobetti; Joel Schwartz; Jianmin Chen; Tangchun Wu; Aaron Cohen; Antonio Gasparrini; Haidong Kan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mary D Willis; Olivia R Orta; Collette Ncube; Amelia K Wesselink; Lan N Ðoàn; Kipruto Kirwa; Renée Boynton-Jarrett; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-06-01
Authors: Amelia K Wesselink; Sydney K Willis; Anne Sofie Dam Laursen; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Tanran R Wang; Ellen Trolle; Katherine L Tucker; Kenneth J Rothman; Lauren A Wise; Elizabeth E Hatch Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 4.865