» Articles » PMID: 28480506

County-level Cumulative Environmental Quality Associated with Cancer Incidence

Overview
Journal Cancer
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Oncology
Date 2017 May 9
PMID 28480506
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Individual environmental exposures are associated with cancer development; however, environmental exposures occur simultaneously. The Environmental Quality Index (EQI) is a county-level measure of cumulative environmental exposures that occur in 5 domains.

Methods: The EQI was linked to county-level annual age-adjusted cancer incidence rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program state cancer profiles. All-site cancer and the top 3 site-specific cancers for male and female subjects were considered. Incident rate differences (IRDs; annual rate difference per 100,000 persons) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed-slope, random intercept multilevel linear regression models. Associations were assessed with domain-specific indices and analyses were stratified by rural/urban status.

Results: Comparing the highest quintile/poorest environmental quality with the lowest quintile/best environmental quality for overall EQI, all-site county-level cancer incidence rate was positively associated with poor environmental quality overall (IRD, 38.55; 95% CI, 29.57-47.53) and for male (IRD, 32.60; 95% CI, 16.28-48.91) and female (IRD, 30.34; 95% CI, 20.47-40.21) subjects, indicating a potential increase in cancer incidence with decreasing environmental quality. Rural/urban stratified models demonstrated positive associations comparing the highest with the lowest quintiles for all strata, except the thinly populated/rural stratum and in the metropolitan/urbanized stratum. Prostate and breast cancer demonstrated the strongest positive associations with poor environmental quality.

Conclusion: We observed strong positive associations between the EQI and all-site cancer incidence rates, and associations differed by rural/urban status and environmental domain. Research focusing on single environmental exposures in cancer development may not address the broader environmental context in which cancers develop, and future research should address cumulative environmental exposures. Cancer 2017;123:2901-8. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Citing Articles

Associations between Structural Racism, Environmental Burden, and Cancer Rates: An Ecological Study of US Counties.

Robinson-Oghogho J, Alcaraz K, Thorpe Jr R Ethn Dis. 2024; 34(3):145-154.

PMID: 39211816 PMC: 11354823. DOI: 10.18865/EthnDis-2023-68.


Landscape analysis of environmental data sources for linkage with SEER cancer patients database.

Tatalovich Z, Chtourou A, Zhu L, Dellavalle C, Hanson H, Henry K J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2024; 2024(65):132-144.

PMID: 39102880 PMC: 11300022. DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgae015.


An exploratory analysis of the impact of area-level exposome on geographic disparities in aggressive prostate cancer.

Wiese D, DuBois T, Sorice K, Fang C, Ragin C, Daly M Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):16900.

PMID: 39075110 PMC: 11286755. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-63726-0.


Geospatial Modeling Methods in Epidemiological Kidney Research: An Overview and Practical Example.

Buchalter R, Mohan S, Schold J Kidney Int Rep. 2024; 9(4):807-816.

PMID: 38765574 PMC: 11101776. DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2024.01.017.


Structural Racism as a Contributor to Lung Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates Among Black Populations in the United States.

Robinson-Oghogho J, Alcaraz K, Thorpe Jr R Cancer Control. 2024; 31:10732748241248363.

PMID: 38698674 PMC: 11067682. DOI: 10.1177/10732748241248363.


References
1.
Belpomme D, Irigaray P, Hardell L, Clapp R, Montagnier L, Epstein S . The multitude and diversity of environmental carcinogens. Environ Res. 2007; 105(3):414-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2007.07.002. View

2.
Risch N . The genetic epidemiology of cancer: interpreting family and twin studies and their implications for molecular genetic approaches. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2001; 10(7):733-41. View

3.
Blair A, Beane Freeman L . Epidemiologic studies in agricultural populations: observations and future directions. J Agromedicine. 2009; 14(2):125-31. PMC: 2682692. DOI: 10.1080/10599240902779436. View

4.
Morello-Frosch R, Zuk M, Jerrett M, Shamasunder B, Kyle A . Understanding the cumulative impacts of inequalities in environmental health: implications for policy. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011; 30(5):879-87. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0153. View

5.
Henry K, Sherman R, Farber S, Cockburn M, Goldberg D, Stroup A . The joint effects of census tract poverty and geographic access on late-stage breast cancer diagnosis in 10 US States. Health Place. 2013; 21:110-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.01.007. View