Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102)☆
Introduction
With rapidly increasing applications for wireless devices targeting populations of all ages, exposures to the associated radiofrequency radiation (RFR) are increasing in number and diversity. Radiation sources include communications devices such as mobile (cell) or cordless phones, laptops and tablets, baby monitors, wearable devices and associated infrastructure (e.g. routers, antennae on towers, and distributed antennae systems (DAS) that can employ directional couplers or wireless amplifiers to enhance accessibility). Thus, the technology entails direct and growing personal exposures to an expanding array of wireless transmitting devices (WTDs).
In 2011, a Working Group of the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) (IARC, 2013). In this paper we review the human epidemiology and some other relevant studies published since the IARC Working Group meeting.
The principal sources of exposure of humans to RFR are cell and cordless phones. The radiated power and technologies for cell phones have evolved over the years, as summarized in Table 1 (Hardell and Carlberg, 2015).
Section snippets
Case-control studies; glioma
Aydin et al. (2011) reported the results of CEFALO, a multicenter case–control study conducted in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Switzerland that included children and adolescents aged 7–19 years (median age 13 years) diagnosed with a brain tumor between 2004 and 2008. In person interviews were conducted with 352 case patients (participation rate: 83%) and 646 control subjects (participation rate: 71%) and their parents. The authors concluded that there was no consistent evidence of increased
Case-control studies; meningioma
Little increased risk of meningioma was found in the five country Interphone analysis, except for the highest category of exposure in those with 7 or more years of use (Table 9).
Carlberg et al. (2013) reported on risk of meningioma from exposure to wireless phone radiation between the years 2007 and 2009, but found no overall association.
Table 10 summarizes the results for meningioma from the report on the French CERENAT case-control study (Coureau et al., 2014). There was only significant
Case-control studies of other cancers and other tumors
Case-control studies have also been performed on other cancers suspected as being associated with RFR exposure. Those examining thyroid and skin cancers are not considered here, as over-diagnosis of thyroid cancer and sun exposure, respectively, result in uncontrolled confounding. As limited studies have been reported thus far on leukemia risks tied with mobile phones, we do not consider these risks here.
In a population-based case-control study of children Li et al. (2012) included 939 leukemia
Cohort studies
In an update of the Danish cohort study of fewer than half a million persons over more than a decade, Frei et al. (2011) reported that when analyses were restricted to individuals with the longest mobile phone use, ≥ 13 years of subscription, the incidence rate ratio was 1.03 (95% CI 0.83–1.27) in men and 0.91 (0.41–2.04) in women. Among those with subscriptions of ≥ 10 years, ratios were 1.04 (0.85–1.26) in men and 1.04 (0.56–1.95) in women for glioma and 0.90 (0.57–1.42) in men and 0.93
Brain tumor incidence, descriptive and trend analyses
Tos et al. (2004) examined Danish incidence rates of vestibular Schwannoma from 1996 to 2001. There is a slow and steady increase from 1976 to 1990, then from 1990 to 1995 a marginal increase followed by a significant increase with a mean incidence per 100,000 population of 1.74 in 1996–2001.
Lehrer et al. (2011) reported a significant correlation between number of cell phone subscriptions and brain tumors in nineteen US states (r = 0.950, P < 0.001) for years 2000–2004 using 2007 cellphone
Case series
West et al. (2013) reported multiple primary breast cancers in young women who had regularly placed a cellphone in their bras (Table 20). Tumors were reported to have occurred subcutaneously directly under the antennas of the phones. Subsequently, a number of other such cases have come to light with unusually located breast tumors relative to reported cell phone storage in the bra.
Peleg (2012) discussed a cancer cluster among young workers at an Israeli Antenna Range Facility. It was believed
Discussion
Because they allow more detailed consideration of exposure and more precision of diagnoses, case-control studies can be superior to prospective cohort studies, or other methods, in evaluating potential risks for cancers. Carrying out a credible, statistically valid cohort study with sufficient power to find a change in rate of a rare cancer such as glioma that occurs at between 7 and 10 per 100,000 in industrialized countries would require a costly detailed prospective study following cellphone
Synthesis and conclusions
The Epidemiological studies reported since the 2011 IARC Working Group meeting are adequate to consider RFR as a probable human carcinogen (Group 2 A). However, they must be supplemented with the recently reported animal data as performed at the Ramazzini Institute and the US National Toxicology Program as well as by mechanistic studies. These experimental findings together with the epidemiology reviewed here are sufficient in our opinion, to upgrade the IARC categorization of RFR to Group 1,
Funding
The Israel Institute for Advanced Study, Environmental Health Trust, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Rutgers University School of Public Health, in part funded our participation in the Expert Forum from which this paper was prepared.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the important contributions of the participants in the Epidemiology Working Group: Amir Borenstein, Irit Livneh, Moe Mellion, Michael Peleg, Elihu Richter, Yael Stein
References (66)
Effect of mobile telephones on sperm quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Environ. Int.
(2014)Mobile phone use and the brain cancer incidence rate in Australia
Cancer Epidemiol.
(2016)- et al.
On the association between glioma, wireless phones, heredity and ionising radiation
Pathophysiology
(2012) - et al.
Has the incidence of brain cancer risen in Australia since the introduction of mobile phones 29 years ago?
Cancer Epidemiol.
(2016) - et al.
Response from the authors to correspondence related to ‘Has the incidence of brain cancer risen in Australia since the introduction of mobile phones 29 years ago?’
Cancer Epidemiol.
(2016) Inferring the 1985–2014 impact of mobile phone use on selected brain cancer subtypes using Bayesian structural time series and synthetic controls
Environ. Int.
(2016)- et al.
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: fact or fiction?
Sci. Total Environ.
(2012) - et al.
Mobile phone and cordless phone use and the risk for glioma - analysis of pooled case-control studies in Sweden, 1997–2003 and 2007–2009
Pathophysiology
(2015) A population-based case-control study of radiofrequency exposure in relation to childhood neoplasm
Sci. Total Environ.
(2012)- et al.
Radio frequency radiation-related cancer: assessing causation in the occupational/military setting
Environ. Res.
(2018)
Cancer morbidity in subjects occupationally exposed to high frequency (radiofrequency and microwave) electromagnetic radiation
Sci. Total Environ.
Primary brain tumors and mobile cell phone usage
Cancer Epidemiol.
Incidence trends in the anatomic location of primary malignant brain tumors in the United States: 1992–2006
World Neurosurg.
Connection between cell phone use, p53 gene expression in different zones of glioblastoma multiforme and survival prognoses
Rare Tumors
Mobile phone use and brain tumors in children and adolescents: a multicenter case-control study
J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
Descriptive epidemiology of CNS tumors in France: results from the Gironde Registry for the period 2000–2007
Neuro-Oncol.
Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder
Rev. Environ. Health
Corrigendum to: reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder
Rev. Environ. Health
Microwaves from UMTS/GSM mobile phones induce long-lasting inhibition of 53BP1/-H2AX DNA repair foci in human lymphocytes
Bioelectromagnetics
Dependence of non–thermal biological effects of microwaves on physical and biological variables: implications for reproducibility and safety standards
Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors – a meta-analysis
Int. J. Occup. Med. Environ. Health
Risk of brain tumours in relation to estimated RF dose from mobile phones: results from five Interphone countries
Occup. Environ. Med.
Use of mobile and cordless phones and survival of patients with glioma
Neuroepidemiology
Pooled analysis of Swedish case-control studies during 1997–2003 and 2007–2009 on meningioma risk associated with the use of mobile and cordless phones
Oncol. Rep.
Meningioma patients diagnosed 2007–2009 and the association with use of mobile and cordless phones: a case-control study
Environ. Health
Mobile phone use and brain tumours in the CERENAT case-control study
Occup. Environ. Med
Causes of death among Belgian professional military radar operators: A 37-year retrospective cohort study
Int. J. Cancer
Increasing incidence of brain and nervous tumours in urban Shanghai, China, 1983–2007
Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev.
Increasing incidence of glioblastoma multiforme and meningioma, and decreasing incidence of Schwannoma (2000–2008): findings of a multicenter Australian study
Surg. Neurol. Int.
Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 ghz gsm base station environmental emission
Environ. Res.
Dosimetric simulations of brain absorption of mobile phone radiation-the relationship between psSAR and age
IEEE Access
Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours: update of Danish cohort study
Br. Med. J.
Cited by (58)
Problems in evaluating the health impacts of radio frequency radiation
2024, Environmental ResearchWireless technologies, non-ionizing electromagnetic fields and children: Identifying and reducing health risks
2023, Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health CareOn radar and radio exposure and cancer in the military setting
2023, Environmental ResearchCitation Excerpt :Numerous non-HL cancer types have been shown to be associated with exposure to RFR. See Szmigielski,1996, Hardell and Carlberg (2021), Miller et al. (2018), thyroid cancer in Luo et al. (2020) and Carlberg et al. (2020), breast cancer in Shih et al (2020), Tynes et al. (1996), West et al. (2013) and Kliukiene et al. (2003), pancreatic cancer in Zaret (1991) and the listing of additional cancer types in Peleg et al. (2018). Animal studies strongly suggest that RFR is a universal carcinogen.
Static magnetic fields from earphones: Detailed measurements plus some open questions
2022, Environmental ResearchCitation Excerpt :Reinforcing that reasoning and linking it to HMF, Xue et al. (2021) provide a review specifically on the effects of HMF on circadian rhythms (see discussion on HMF above, Fig. 5). Upon the possibility of a tumor-promoting effect, it is reasonable to pose that SMF could be a confounding variable in the association found between glioma and acoustic neuroma risk and the use of mobile phones (Bortkiewicz, 2017; Bortkiewicz et al., 2017; Choi et al., 2020; Hardell et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2018; Momoli et al., 2017; Röösli et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2017): were it to be a causal relation between cell phones and head tumors, the causing agent could be the SMF from the mobile phones (Zastko et al., 2021) along with the RF and also the ELF fields (Calderón et al., 2014; Cook et al., 2006; Heath et al., 2007; Ilvonen et al., 2005; Jokela et al., 2004; Linde and Mild, 1997; Perentos et al., 2007). Overall, the diversity of highly contrasting results reported in the literature in relation to SMF and cancer make it unavoidable to conclude that the effects must depend on multiple factors and conditions of experimentation, which make both, beneficial and detrimental effects possible.
- ☆
This paper was prepared for and revised with the Epidemiology Working Group of the Expert Forum: Wireless Radiation and Human Health at the Hebrew University, January 23–26, 2017. sponsored by the Israel Institute for Advanced Study and Environmental Health Trust, with support from the U.S. National Institutes of Health/ National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and Dr. Lucy R. Wiletzky.