Exposure to power frequency magnetic fields and risk of breast cancer in the Upper Cape Cod Cancer Incidence Study

Invited commentary: extremely low-frequency magnetic fields and breast cancer--now it is enough!

Research on an association between extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields and breast cancer has been conducted since the 1980s, based on the hypothesis that ELF fields suppress melatonin production and melatonin protects against breast cancer development. In this issue of the Journal, Li et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(7):1038-1045) present a well-designed study on occupational exposure to ELF fields and breast cancer that adds to the already large pool of data that has not supported the hypothesis. Over time, the quality and statistical power of studies within this research area have increased considerably, and advances in exposure assessment have reduced exposure misclassification. The evidence is consistently negative. A World Health Organization health risk assessment concluded in 2005 that the evidence from experimental and epidemiologic studies is sufficient to give confidence that ELF magnetic fields do not cause breast cancer. The new study adds even more confidence to this conclusion. We should now focus our time and research resources on more promising hypotheses, the results of which could make a difference for public health and advance science. Further epidemiologic studies on ELF fields and breast cancer are likely to have little new knowledge to add.

A meta-analysis on the relationship between exposure to ELF-EMFs and the risk of female breast cancer

Objective

To comprehensively analyze the relationship between exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMFs) and the development of female breast cancer.

Methods

Reports of case-control studies published from 1990 to 2010 were analyzed. The quality effect model was chosen to calculate total odds ratio (OR) depending on the data in studies and quality scores. Subgroup analyses were also performed by the situation of menopause, estrogenic receptor and exposure assessment respectively.

Results

For all 23 studies the OR was 1.07, 95% CI = 1.02–1.13, for estrogen receptor positive subgroup,OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.03–1.20; for premenopausal subgroup, OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.00–1.23. The results of other subgroups showed no significant association between ELF-EMF and female breast cancer.

Conclusion

ELF-EMFs might be related to an increased risk for female breast cancer, especially for premenopausal and ER+ females. However, it's necessary to undertake better epidemiologic researches to verify the association between ELF-EMF and female breast cancer due to the limits of current study, especially the one on exposure assessment.

Use of electric blankets and association with prevalence of endometrial cancer

The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between electric blanket use and prevalence of endometrial cancer for women. Information relating to women enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Data Set (n=93 676) used to test the relationship factors associated with endometrial cancer included older age at screening, younger age at last menstrual period, region of domicile (highest prevalence in the South), less than a high school education, lower income, body mass index >25 kg/m, low parity, unopposed use of estrogen, never use of estrogen plus progesterone, past alcohol use, higher percentage of daily calories from fat and any electric blanket use. Following a univariate identification of factors significantly related to endometrial cancer, stepwise logistic regression analysis was performed for those factors with P values of less than 0.001 in the univariate analysis. Using electric blankets was associated with a 15% higher prevalence of endometrial cancer than never having used electric blankets (odds ratio=1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.27). After controlling for variables significantly associated with endometrial cancer, use of electric blankets for 20 years or more was associated with 36% higher prevalence of endometrial cancer (odds ratio=1.36, 95% confidence interval: 1.16-1.59). Although we were unable to determine the duration of electric blanket use before diagnosis of endometrial cancer, we found that women using electric blankets for 20 years or more had a significantly higher prevalence.

Science and society: the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project

In the early 1990s, breast cancer advocates petitioned the United States Congress to investigate the high rates of breast cancer on Long Island in the state of New York. The resulting law led to the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project (LIBCSP)--more than ten research projects designed to study the possible causes of this increased incidence of cancer. This project reported that there was no evidence that environmental exposures were responsible. Controversial from its start, the LIBCSP has had an important role in efforts to understand the reasons for the high rates of breast cancer in some regions of the United States.

The Effect of Environment on Breast Cancer Risk

Environmental factors are believed to explain a large proportion of breast cancer incidence. Known risk factors for breast cancer, which are related to the reproductive life of women, and other factors, such as inheritance and socioeconomic status, explain only about half of the breast cancer cases in the US. Ionizing radiation is a well established environmental risk factor for breast cancer. Chemicals that induce mammary cancer in rodents have served as leads for studies in humans, but occupational and environmental exposure to these chemicals have for the most part lacked association with breast cancer risk. However, there is recent evidence in rats that cadmium at very low doses acts as an estrogen mimic, indicating a need to investigate the effects of metals on breast cancer risk. Studies suggest that circadian rhythm disruption is linked with breast cancer, but too few studies have been done to be conclusive. Over the years, cigarette smoking as a risk factor for breast cancer has remained controversial. However, recent research has found passive smoke exposure to be associated with increased breast cancer risk, which is hypothesized to be accounted for on the basis of an antiestrogenic effect of smoking. Solar radiation has been noted to be associated with reduced breast cancer, supporting the hypothesis that vitamin D plays a protective role in reducing this risk. Although, most of the environmental factors discussed in this review have not been convincingly found to influence breast cancer risk, research suggests that environmental exposure in combination with genetic pre-disposition, age at exposure, and hormonal milieu have a cumulative effect on breast cancer risk.

Occupational exposures to extremely low frequency magnetic fields and postmenopausal breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The association between occupational exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MF) and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer was assessed in a case-control study.

METHODS

Breast cancer cases were compared to cancer controls. Interviewers elicited information on risk factors and on lifetime work history. Industrial hygienists assigned to each job average duration of exposure to ELF-MF at four levels of intensities ("none," <0.2 microT; "low," 0.2-<0.5microT; "medium," 0.5-<1microT; "high," > or =1-10microT). Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

A total number of 608 cases and 667 controls participated. Adjusting for accepted breast cancer risk factors, we found an OR of 1.13 for lifetime occupational exposure to ELF-MF at medium or high intensities. Risks were larger for exposures before age 35 (OR = 1.40), and statistically significant for exposures before 35 among cases with progesterone receptor positive tumors (OR = 1.56, 95% CI=1.02-2.39).

CONCLUSIONS

There appears to be a small increased risk for breast cancer among postmenopausal women exposed occupationally to ELF-MF.

Electric Blanket Use and Breast Cancer on Long Island

BACKGROUND

Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has been hypothesized to increase the risk of breast cancer by inhibiting the normal nocturnal rise in melatonin levels.

METHODS

Information on electric blanket use was collected in a large, 2-stage, population-based, case-control investigation of breast cancer, The Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project (LIBCSP) and the EMF and Breast Cancer on Long Island Study (EBCLIS). The LIBCSP used a comprehensive questionnaire, including questions about electric appliance use, with responses available on 1354 cases diagnosed between mid-1996 and mid-1997 and 1426 control subjects. EBCLIS enrolled 576 cases and 585 control subjects who had participated in the LIBCSP and who had lived in their current homes for at least 15 years. EBCLIS participants were interviewed to obtain additional information on EMF exposures, including detailed questions on electric blanket use.

RESULTS

Analyses of both the EBCLIS and the LIBCSP groups showed no association with breast cancer for ever-use of electric blankets, current or former use, use directly on the body, or use throughout the night in either pre- or postmenopausal women (range of adjusted odds ratios for ever vs. never use: 0.9-1.2). Furthermore, there was no trend in risk with increased duration of use, frequency of use, or other indicators of more intense exposure to EMF. Electric blanket use was not associated with hormone receptor status of the tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this large investigation are consistent with those of most previous studies, and do not support the hypothesis that electric blanket use is associated with increased breast cancer risk.

Environmental risk factors for breast cancer among African-American women

There are few unequivocably established environmental carcinogens for breast cancer in women. Nevertheless, environmental factors are believed to explain much of the international variation in breast cancer risk and possibly differences among racial/ethnic groups. Along with lifestyle, some adverse exposures may be higher in minority racial/ethnic groups and in underserved populations that experience higher ambient contamination. Associations have been found between environmental agents and breast cancer in subgroups of women who can be identified by common susceptibility traits as well as by timing of exposures at certain milestones of reproductive life. Susceptibility can be defined by social, environmental, and genetic modalities-factors that may predominate in certain racial/ethnic groups but that also transcend racial/ethnic boundaries. For example, genes involved in transcription and estrogen metabolism have rapid variants that are more prevalent among African-Americans, yet risk accompanying metabolic changes from these genes will prevail in all racial/ethnic groups. Lack of reliable exposure assessment remains a principal obstacle to elucidating the role of environmental exposures in breast cancer. Resources must be identified and consolidated that will enable scientists to improve exposure assessment and to assemble studies of sufficient size to address questions regarding exposure, susceptibility, and vulnerability factors in breast cancer. Breast cancer studies should be expanded to examine combinations of chemicals as well as competing or complementary exposures such as endogenous hormones, dietary intake, and behavioral factors.

Residential magnetic fields and the risk of breast cancer

Chronic exposure to 60-Hz magnetic fields may increase the risk of breast cancer by suppressing the normal nocturnal production of melatonin. This population-based case-control study investigated whether such exposure is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer in women aged 20-74 years from the greater Seattle, Washington, area. Cases were diagnosed between November 1992 and March 1995 (n = 813); controls were identified by random digit dialing and were frequency matched by 5-year age groups (n = 793). Exposure was estimated using magnetic field measurements in the home at diagnosis, wiring configuration of all homes occupied in the 10 years prior to diagnosis, and self-reported measures of at-home electric appliance use. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using conditional logistic regression with adjustment for other potential risk factors. Risk did not increase with measured nighttime bedroom magnetic field level, wiring configuration of the home at diagnosis, weighted summary wire codes of all homes occupied 5 and 10 years prior to diagnosis, or reported use of common household appliances, including bed-warming devices. These data do not support the hypothesis that exposure to residential magnetic fields is associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer.

Electric blanket or mattress cover use and breast cancer incidence in women 50-79 years of age

Previous research has demonstrated inconsistent associations between electromagnetic radiation, especially from electric blanket use, and breast cancer. Breast cancer risk according to electric blanket or mattress cover use was examined as part of a multicenter population-based case-control study. Breast cancer patients 50-79 years of age (N = 1949) were identified from statewide tumor registries in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin from the period June 1994 to July 1995. Women of similar age were randomly selected from population lists as controls. Information regarding electric blanket and mattress cover use and breast cancer risk factors was obtained through telephone interviews. After adjustment for age, body mass index, and other breast cancer risk factors, the risk of breast cancer was similar among ever-users (relative risk = 0.93; 95% confidence interval = 0.82-1.06) and lower among current users than among never-users (relative risk = 0.79; 95% confidence interval = 0.66-0.95). There was no evidence of a dose-response relation with increasing number of months that electric blankets had been used. This study provides evidence against a positive association between electric blanket or mattress cover use and breast cancer.

Population-based case-control study of occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields and breast cancer

PURPOSE

This population-based case-control study examined occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields in relation to female breast cancer incidence among 843 breast cancer cases and 773 controls.

METHODS

Exposure was classified based on work in the two longest-held jobs, and indices of cumulative exposure to magnetic fields based on a measurement survey.

RESULTS

Female breast cancer was not associated with employment as an office or industrial worker. For the total study population, cumulative exposure over the entire career, and in the past 0-10 and 10-20 years generally showed odds ratios (ORs) close to the null. Moderately elevated risks were found for intermediate but not high levels of cumulative exposure accumulated 20 or more years ago (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.1-2.0). Associations were stronger for premenopausal women (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.1-2.7) in the past 10-20 years, and those with estrogen-receptor positive (ER+) breast tumors (OR = 2.06; 95% CI = 1.1-4.0). No consistent dose-response patterns were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings give little support to the hypothesis that electromagnetic fields cause cancer of the female breast.

Electric blanket use and breast cancer in the Nurses' Health Study

Electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) have been hypothesized to increase the risk of breast cancer, and electric blankets represent an important source of exposure to EMFs. The authors examined the relation between electric blanket use and invasive breast cancer in the Nurses' Health Study. On the biennial questionnaire in 1992, 87,497 women provided information on this exposure during three consecutive time periods. In a prospective analysis with 301,775 person-years of follow-up through 1996 (954 cases), the relative risk for any electric blanket use was not elevated (relative risk (RR) = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95, 1.24) after controlling for breast cancer risk factors. There was a weak association between breast cancer and electric blanket use at least 16 years before diagnosis and long-term use in age-adjusted analyses but not in multivariate models. In a retrospective analysis of 1,318,683 person-years of follow-up (2,426 cases), the multivariate relative risk associated with use before disease follow-up began was null (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.16). Similar results were obtained in analyses stratified by menopause and restricted to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. While 95% confidence intervals for these estimates did not exclude small risks, overall, results did not support an association between breast cancer risk and exposure to EMFs from electric blankets.

Breast cancer and electromagnetic fields--a review

PURPOSE

Several statements have been issued to the effect that no consistent, significant link has been demonstrated between cancer and electromagnetic fields (EMF). However, there continues to be much interest in a possible association with breast cancer, in part because breast cancer risk is substantially higher in industrialized countries than in other areas, and electric power generation and consumption is one of the hallmarks of industrialized societies. In 1987, Stevens proposed a biological mechanism whereby two products of electric power generation, EMF and light at night, might contribute to mammary carcinogenesis through inhibition of melatonin.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review of the epidemiologic literature and hypothesized mechanisms pertaining to EMF exposure and the risk of breast cancer, in order to assess whether or not there was evidence to suggest a link between EMF and breast cancer.

RESULTS

Some occupational epidemiological studies have demonstrated an increased incidence of breast cancer among mainly male electrical workers. It has been difficult to study women, as few are employed in these types of occupations. In all, there have been eleven occupational studies related to breast cancer in women, and statistically significant risk ratios have been observed: 1.98 for pre-menopausal women in occupations with high EMF exposure in one study, 2.17 in all women who worked as telephone installers, repairers, and line workers in another study, and 1.65 for system analysts/ programmers, 1.40 for telegraph and radio operators, and 1.27 for telephone operators in a third study. However, six of the studies did not find any significant effects and two found effects only in subgroups. The results of the eight studies of residential exposure and four electric blanket studies have been inconsistent, with most not demonstrating any significant association. However, this might be attributed, at least to some extent, to difficulties in assessing residential exposure in these studies, as well as other methodological considerations.

CONCLUSIONS

The biologic plausibility of an association between EMF and breast cancer, coupled with suggestive data from occupational studies and unexplained high incidence rates of breast cancer, suggests that further investigation of this possible association is warranted.

Occupational and residential magnetic field exposure and breast cancer in females

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of occupational magnetic field exposure on breast cancer in females and to combine residential and occupational magnetic field exposure to reduce misclassification. The study was conducted as a case-control study within a population living within 300 meters of transmission lines in Sweden. We identified cases of breast cancer in females from the national cancer registry, and we selected one matched control per case at random. Residential exposure was estimated through calculations of the magnetic fields generated by power lines. We obtained information about occupation from censuses, and the occupations were linked to a job-exposure matrix that was based on magnetic field measurements. For occupational exposure to magnetic fields over 0.25 microT closest in time before diagnosis, the estimated relative risk was 1.0 [96% confidence interval (CI) = 0.6-1.7]. Women below age 50 years at diagnosis had a relative risk of 1.5 (95% CI = 0.6-3.5). For women below 50 years of age who had estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, there was a relative risk of 3.2 (95% CI = 0.5-18.9). The results for residential and occupational exposures combined showed similar results.

Effect of 13 week magnetic field exposures on DMBA-initiated mammary gland carcinomas in female Sprague-Dawley rats

Several studies suggest that exposure to 50 Hz magnetic fields may promote chemically induced breast cancer in rats. Groups of 100 female Sprague-Dawley rats were initiated with four weekly 5 mg gavage doses of 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (DMBA) starting at 50 days of age. After the first weekly DMBA administration, exposure to ambient fields (sham exposed), 50 Hz magnetic fields at either 1 or 5 G field intensity or 60 Hz fields at 1 G for 18.5 h/day, 7 days/week was initiated. Exposure continued for 13 weeks. A vehicle control group without DMBA was included. In a second study, using lower doses of DMBA, groups of 100 female Sprague-Dawley rats were initiated with four weekly doses of 2 mg of DMBA starting at 50 days of age followed, after the first weekly DMBA administration, by exposure to ambient fields (sham exposed) or 50 Hz magnetic fields at either 1 or 5 G field intensity for 18.5 h/day, 7 days/week for 13 weeks. Rats were weighed and palpated weekly for the presence of tumors. There was no effect of magnetic field exposure on body weight gains or on the time of appearance of mammary tumors in either study. At the end of 13 weeks, the animals were killed and the mammary tumors counted and measured. Mammary gland masses found grossly were examined histologically. In the first 13 week study, the mammary gland carcinoma incidences were 92, 86, 96 and 96% for the DMBA controls, 1 G, 50 Hz, 5 G, 50 Hz and 1 G, 60 Hz groups, respectively. The total numbers of carcinomas were 691, 528 (P < 0. 05, decrease), 561 and 692 for the DMBA controls, 1 G, 50 Hz, 5 G, 50 Hz and 1 G, 60 Hz groups, respectively. In study 2, the mammary gland carcinoma incidences were 43, 48 and 38% for the DMBA controls, 1 G, 50 Hz and 5 G, 50 Hz groups, respectively. The total numbers of carcinomas were 102, 90 and 79 for the DMBA controls, 1 G, 50 Hz and 5 G, 50 Hz groups, respectively. There was no effect of magnetic field exposure on tumor size either by in-life palpation or by measurement at necropsy in either study. There was no evidence that 50 or 60 Hz magnetic fields promoted breast cancer in these studies in female rats. These studies do not support the hypothesis that magnetic field exposure promotes breast cancer in this DMBA rat model.