TY - JOUR

T1 - Exposure to long-term source-specific transportation noise and incident breast cancer

T2 - A pooled study of eight Nordic cohorts

AU - Thacher, Jesse D

AU - Oudin, Anna

AU - Flanagan, Erin

AU - Mattisson, Kristoffer

AU - Albin, Maria

AU - Roswall, Nina

AU - Pyko, Andrei

AU - Aasvang, Gunn Marit

AU - Andersen, Zorana J

AU - Borgquist, Signe

AU - Brandt, Jørgen

AU - Broberg, Karin

AU - Cole-Hunter, Thomas

AU - Eriksson, Charlotta

AU - Eneroth, Kristina

AU - Gudjonsdottir, Hrafnhildur

AU - Helte, Emilie

AU - Ketzel, Matthias

AU - Lanki, Timo

AU - Lim, Youn-Hee

AU - Leander, Karin

AU - Ljungman, Petter

AU - Manjer, Jonas

AU - Männistö, Satu

AU - Raaschou-Nielsen, Ole

AU - Pershagen, Göran

AU - Rizzuto, Debora

AU - Sandsveden, Malte

AU - Selander, Jenny

AU - Simonsen, Mette K

AU - Stucki, Lara

AU - Spanne, Mårten

AU - Stockfelt, Leo

AU - Tjønneland, Anne

AU - Yli-Tuomi, Tarja

AU - Tiittanen, Pekka

AU - Valencia, Victor H

AU - Ögren, Mikael

AU - Åkesson, Agneta

AU - Sørensen, Mette

N1 - Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - BACKGROUND: Environmental noise is an important environmental exposure that can affect health. An association between transportation noise and breast cancer incidence has been suggested, although current evidence is limited. We investigated the pooled association between long-term exposure to transportation noise and breast cancer incidence.METHODS: Pooled data from eight Nordic cohorts provided a study population of 111,492 women. Road, railway, and aircraft noise were modelled at residential addresses. Breast cancer incidence (all, estrogen receptor (ER) positive, and ER negative) was derived from cancer registries. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox Proportional Hazards Models, adjusting main models for sociodemographic and lifestyle variables together with long-term exposure to air pollution.RESULTS: A total of 93,859 women were included in the analyses, of whom 5,875 developed breast cancer. The median (5th-95th percentile) 5-year residential road traffic noise was 54.8 (40.0-67.8) dB Lden, and among those exposed, the median railway noise was 51.0 (41.2-65.8) dB Lden. We observed a pooled HR for breast cancer (95 % confidence interval (CI)) of 1.03 (0.99-1.06) per 10 dB increase in 5-year mean exposure to road traffic noise, and 1.03 (95 % CI: 0.96-1.11) for railway noise, after adjustment for lifestyle and sociodemographic covariates. HRs remained unchanged in analyses with further adjustment for PM 2.5 and attenuated when adjusted for NO 2 (HRs from 1.02 to 1.01), in analyses using the same sample. For aircraft noise, no association was observed. The associations did not vary by ER status for any noise source. In analyses using <60 dB as a cutoff, we found HRs of 1.08 (0.99-1.18) for road traffic and 1.19 (0.95-1.49) for railway noise. CONCLUSIONS: We found weak associations between road and railway noise and breast cancer risk. More high-quality prospective studies are needed, particularly among those exposed to railway and aircraft noise before conclusions regarding noise as a risk factor for breast cancer can be made.

AB - BACKGROUND: Environmental noise is an important environmental exposure that can affect health. An association between transportation noise and breast cancer incidence has been suggested, although current evidence is limited. We investigated the pooled association between long-term exposure to transportation noise and breast cancer incidence.METHODS: Pooled data from eight Nordic cohorts provided a study population of 111,492 women. Road, railway, and aircraft noise were modelled at residential addresses. Breast cancer incidence (all, estrogen receptor (ER) positive, and ER negative) was derived from cancer registries. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox Proportional Hazards Models, adjusting main models for sociodemographic and lifestyle variables together with long-term exposure to air pollution.RESULTS: A total of 93,859 women were included in the analyses, of whom 5,875 developed breast cancer. The median (5th-95th percentile) 5-year residential road traffic noise was 54.8 (40.0-67.8) dB Lden, and among those exposed, the median railway noise was 51.0 (41.2-65.8) dB Lden. We observed a pooled HR for breast cancer (95 % confidence interval (CI)) of 1.03 (0.99-1.06) per 10 dB increase in 5-year mean exposure to road traffic noise, and 1.03 (95 % CI: 0.96-1.11) for railway noise, after adjustment for lifestyle and sociodemographic covariates. HRs remained unchanged in analyses with further adjustment for PM 2.5 and attenuated when adjusted for NO 2 (HRs from 1.02 to 1.01), in analyses using the same sample. For aircraft noise, no association was observed. The associations did not vary by ER status for any noise source. In analyses using <60 dB as a cutoff, we found HRs of 1.08 (0.99-1.18) for road traffic and 1.19 (0.95-1.49) for railway noise. CONCLUSIONS: We found weak associations between road and railway noise and breast cancer risk. More high-quality prospective studies are needed, particularly among those exposed to railway and aircraft noise before conclusions regarding noise as a risk factor for breast cancer can be made.

U2 - 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108108

DO - 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108108

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 37490787

VL - 178

JO - Environment international

JF - Environment international

SN - 0160-4120

M1 - 108108

ER -