4.7 Article

Long-term air pollution exposure and malignant intracranial tumours of the central nervous system: a pooled analysis of six European cohorts

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 129, 期 4, 页码 656-664

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-023-02348-1

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the association between residential exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particles (PM2.5), black carbon (BC), ozone (O3), and eight elemental components of PM2.5 and malignant tumours of the central nervous system (CNS). The results indicated a potential association between NO2, PM2.5, and BC exposure and CNS tumours, while the PM elements did not show consistent association with tumour incidence.
BackgroundRisk factors for malignant tumours of the central nervous system (CNS) are largely unknown.MethodsWe pooled six European cohorts (N = 302,493) and assessed the association between residential exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particles (PM2.5), black carbon (BC), ozone (O-3) and eight elemental components of PM2.5 (copper, iron, potassium, nickel, sulfur, silicon, vanadium, and zinc) and malignant intracranial CNS tumours defined according to the International Classification of Diseases ICD-9/ICD-10 codes 192.1/C70.0, 191.0-191.9/C71.0-C71.9, 192.0/C72.2-C72.5. We applied Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for potential confounders at the individual and area-level.ResultsDuring 5,497,514 person-years of follow-up (average 18.2 years), we observed 623 malignant CNS tumours. The results of the fully adjusted linear analyses showed a hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 1.07 (0.95, 1.21) per 10 & mu;g/m(3) NO2, 1.17 (0.96, 1.41) per 5 & mu;g/m(3) PM2.5, 1.10 (0.97, 1.25) per 0.5 10(-5)m(-1) BC, and 0.99 (0.84, 1.17) per 10 & mu;g/m(3) O-3.ConclusionsWe observed indications of an association between exposure to NO2, PM2.5, and BC and tumours of the CNS. The PM elements were not consistently associated with CNS tumour incidence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据