The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A systematic review of human observational studies – Part I: Most researched outcomes
Ken Karipidis,Dan Baaken,Tom Loney,Maria Blettner,Chris Brzozek,Mark Elwood,Clement Narh,Nicola Orsini,Martin Röösli,Marilia Silva Paulo,Susanna Lagorio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2024.108983
IF: 11.8
2024-09-03
Environment International
Abstract:Background The objective of this review was to assess the quality and strength of the evidence provided by human observational studies for a causal association between exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) and risk of the most investigated neoplastic diseases. Methods Eligibility criteria : We included cohort and case-control studies of neoplasia risks in relation to three types of exposure to RF-EMF: near-field, head-localized, exposure from wireless phone use (SR-A); far-field, whole body, environmental exposure from fixed-site transmitters (SR-B); near/far-field occupational exposures from use of hand-held transceivers or RF-emitting equipment in the workplace (SR-C). While no restrictions on tumour type were applied, in the current paper we focus on incidence-based studies of selected "critical" neoplasms of the central nervous system (brain, meninges, pituitary gland, acoustic nerve) and salivary gland tumours (SR-A); brain tumours and leukaemias (SR-B, SR-C). We focussed on investigations of specific neoplasms in relation to specific exposure sources (i.e. E-O pairs), noting that a single article may address multiple E-O pairs. Information sources : Eligible studies were identified by literature searches through Medline, Embase, and EMF-Portal. Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment : We used a tailored version of the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) RoB tool to evaluate each study's internal validity. At the summary RoB step, studies were classified into three tiers according to their overall potential for bias (low, moderate and high). Data synthesis : We synthesized the study results using random effects restricted maximum likelihood (REML) models (overall and subgroup meta-analyses of dichotomous and categorical exposure variables), and weighted mixed effects models (dose–response meta-analyses of lifetime exposure intensity). Evidence assessment : Confidence in evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Results We included 63 aetiological articles, published between 1994 and 2022, with participants from 22 countries, reporting on 119 different E-O pairs. RF-EMF exposure from mobile phones (ever or regular use vs no or non-regular use) was not associated with an increased risk of glioma [meta-estimate of the relative risk (mRR) = 1.01, 95 % CI = 0.89–1.13), meningioma (mRR = 0.92, 95 % CI = 0.82–1.02), acoustic neuroma (mRR = 1.03, 95 % CI = 0.85–1.24), pituitary tumours (mRR = 0.81, 95 % CI = 0.61–1.06), salivary gland tumours (mRR = 0.91, 95 % CI = 0.78–1.06), or paediatric (children, adolescents and young adults) brain tumours (mRR = 1.06, 95 % CI = 0.74–1.51), with variable degree of across-study heterogeneity (I 2 = 0 %-62 %). There was no observable increase in mRRs for the most investigated neoplasms (glioma, meningioma, and acoustic neuroma) with increasing time since start (TSS) use of mobile phones, cumulative call time (CCT), or cumulative number of calls (CNC). Cordless phone use was not significantly associated with risks of glioma [mRR = 1.04, 95 % CI = 0.74–1.46; I 2 = 74 %) meningioma, (mRR = 0.91, 95 % CI = 0.70–1.18; I 2 = 59 %), or acoustic neuroma (mRR = 1.16; 95 % CI = 0.83–1.61; I 2 = 63 %). Exposure from fixed-site transmitters (broadcasting antennas or base stations) was not associated with childhood leukaemia or paediatric brain tumour risks, independently of the level of the modelled RF exposure. Glioma risk was not significantly increased following occupational RF exposure (ever vs never), and no differences were detected between increasing categories of modelled cumulative exposure levels. Discussion In the sensitivity analyses of glioma, meningioma, and acoustic neuroma risks in relation to mobile phone use (ever use, TSS, CCT, and CNC) the presented results were robust and not affected by changes in study aggregation. In a leave-one-out meta-analyses of glioma risk in relation to mobile phone use we identified one influential study. In subsequent meta-analyses performed after excluding this study, we observed a substantial reduction in the mRR and the heterogeneity between studies, for both the contrast Ever vs Never (regular) use (mRR = 0.96, 95 % CI = 0.87–1.07, I 2 = 47 %), and in the analysis by increasing categories of TSS ("<5 years": mRR = 0.97, 95 % CI = 0.83–1.14, I 2 = 41 %; "5-9 years ": mRR = 0.96, 95 % CI = 0.83–1.11, I 2 = 34 %; "10+ years": mRR = 0.97, 95 % CI = 0.87–1.08, I 2 = 10 %).</p -Abstract Truncated-
environmental sciences