Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024
Fine Particulate Matter, Noise Pollution, and Greenspace and Prostate Cancer Risk in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Cohort.
СтатьяResearch Support, N.I.H., IntramuralНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thomas Aleah L, Rhee Jongeun, Fisher Jared A, Horner Marie-Josephe, Jones Rena R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Greenspace is hypothesized as being protective against cancer, whereas noise pollution and fine particulate matter (<2.5 μm in diameter, PM2.5) are both potential risk factors. Findings from recent studies of greenspace and PM2.5 with prostate cancer are not conclusive and the association between noise exposure and cancer has not been evaluated in a U.S. study.
METHODS: We assessed PM2.5, noise, and greenspace exposure using spatiotemporal models and satellite-based estimates at enrollment addresses for N = 43,184 male participants of the prospective Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer (PLCO) Screening Trial cohort (enrolled 1994-2001). We used Cox regression models adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, study center, family history of prostate cancer, and Area Deprivation Index to estimate associations between ambient PM2.5 (μg/m3), greenspace (index range from -1 to 1), and noise pollution (loudest 10% of total existing sound, decibels) and incident prostate cancer risk through December 2017.
RESULTS: A total of 6,327 cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed among male participants during follow-up. PM2.5 and noise exposures were moderately positively correlated (Spearman ρ = 0.46), and PM2.5 and greenspace were not correlated (ρ = 0.10); greenspace and noise were inversely correlated (ρ = -0.32). In single-pollutant and multipollutant models mutually adjusted for coexposures, we found no associations with prostate cancer risk.
CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence that PM2.5, greenspace, and noise pollution were associated with prostate cancer risk in this large, geographically spread cohort.
IMPACT: This study contributes to a small body of existing literature investigating these biologically plausible associations.
METHODS: We assessed PM2.5, noise, and greenspace exposure using spatiotemporal models and satellite-based estimates at enrollment addresses for N = 43,184 male participants of the prospective Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer (PLCO) Screening Trial cohort (enrolled 1994-2001). We used Cox regression models adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, study center, family history of prostate cancer, and Area Deprivation Index to estimate associations between ambient PM2.5 (μg/m3), greenspace (index range from -1 to 1), and noise pollution (loudest 10% of total existing sound, decibels) and incident prostate cancer risk through December 2017.
RESULTS: A total of 6,327 cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed among male participants during follow-up. PM2.5 and noise exposures were moderately positively correlated (Spearman ρ = 0.46), and PM2.5 and greenspace were not correlated (ρ = 0.10); greenspace and noise were inversely correlated (ρ = -0.32). In single-pollutant and multipollutant models mutually adjusted for coexposures, we found no associations with prostate cancer risk.
CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence that PM2.5, greenspace, and noise pollution were associated with prostate cancer risk in this large, geographically spread cohort.
IMPACT: This study contributes to a small body of existing literature investigating these biologically plausible associations.