Satta G, Mascia N, Serra T, Salis A, Saba L, Sanna S, Zucca MG, Angelucci E, Gabbas A, Culurgioni F, Pili P, Mura E, Cappai M, Ennas MG, Cocco P. Estimates of Environmental Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields and Risk of Lymphoma Subtypes.
Radiat Res 2018;
189:541-547. [PMID:
29547352 DOI:
10.1667/rr14952.1]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
We investigated the association between environmental exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) and risk of lymphoma subtypes in a case-control study comprised of 322 patients and 444 individuals serving as controls in Sardinia, Italy in 1998-2004. Questionnaire information included the self-reported distance of the three longest held residential addresses from fixed radio-television transmitters and mobile phone base stations. We georeferenced the residential addresses of all study subjects and obtained the spatial coordinates of mobile phone base stations. For each address within a 500-meter radius from a mobile phone base station, we estimated the RF-EMF intensity using predictions from spatial models, and we performed RF-EMF measurements at the door in the subset of the longest held addresses within a 250-meter radius. We calculated risk of lymphoma and its major subtypes associated with the RF-EMF exposure metrics with unconditional logistic regression, adjusting by age, gender and years of education. In the analysis of self-reported data, risk associated with residence in proximity (within 50 meters) to fixed radio-television transmitters was likewise elevated for lymphoma overall [odds ratio = 2.7, 95% confidence interval = 1.5-4.6], and for the major lymphoma subtypes. With reference to mobile phone base stations, we did not observe an association with either the self-reported, or the geocoded distance from mobile phone base stations. RF-EMF measurements did not vary by case-control status. By comparing the self-reports to the geocoded data, we discovered that the cases tended to underestimate the distance from mobile phone base stations differentially from the controls ( P = 0.073). The interpretation of our findings is compromised by the limited study size, particularly in the analysis of the individual lymphoma subtypes, and the unavailability of the spatial coordinates of radio-television transmitters. Nonetheless, our results do not support the hypothesis of a link between environmental exposure to RF-EMF from mobile phone base stations and risk of lymphoma subtypes.
Collapse