Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ghassan B. Hamra, Neela Guha, Aaron Cohen, Francine Laden, Ole Raaschou-Nielsen, Jonathan M. Samet, Paolo Vineis, Francesco Forastiere, Paulo Saldiva, Takashi Yorifuji, Dana Loomis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

318 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Particulate matter (PM) in outdoor air pollution was recently designated a Group I carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). This determination was based on the evidence regarding the relationship of PM2.5 and PM10 to lung cancer risk; however, the IARC evaluation did not include a quantitative summary of the evidence. Objective: Our goal was to provide a systematic review and quantitative summary of the evidence regarding the relationship between PM and lung cancer. Methods: We conducted meta-analyses of studies examining the relationship of exposure to PM2.5 and PM10 with lung cancer incidence and mortality. In total, 18 studies met our inclusion criteria and provided the information necessary to estimate the change in lung cancer risk per 10-μg/m3 increase in exposure to PM. We used random-effects analyses to allow between-study variability to contribute to meta-estimates. Results: The meta-relative risk for lung cancer associated with PM2.5 was 1.09 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.14). The meta-relative risk of lung cancer associated with PM10 was similar, but less precise: 1.08 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.17). Estimates were robust to restriction to studies that considered potential confounders, as well as subanalyses by exposure assessment method. Analyses by smoking status showed that lung cancer risk associated with PM2.5 was greatest for former smokers [1.44 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.22)], followed by never-smokers [1.18 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.39)], and then current smokers [1.06 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.15)]. In addition, meta-estimates for adenocarcinoma associated with PM2.5 and PM10 were 1.40 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.83) and 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.63), respectively. Conclusion: The results of these analyses, and the decision of the IARC Working Group to classify PM and outdoor air pollution as carcinogenic (Group 1), further justify efforts to reduce exposures to air pollutants that can arise from many sources.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)906-911
Number of pages6
JournalEnvironmental Health Perspectives
Volume122
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Particulate Matter
Meta-Analysis
Lung Neoplasms
International Agencies
Air Pollution
Research
Neoplasms
Air Pollutants
Decision Support Techniques
Carcinogens
Adenocarcinoma
Smoking
Mortality
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Hamra, G. B., Guha, N., Cohen, A., Laden, F., Raaschou-Nielsen, O., Samet, J. M., ... Loomis, D. (2014). Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environmental Health Perspectives, 122(9), 906-911. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408092

Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer : A systematic review and meta-analysis. / Hamra, Ghassan B.; Guha, Neela; Cohen, Aaron; Laden, Francine; Raaschou-Nielsen, Ole; Samet, Jonathan M.; Vineis, Paolo; Forastiere, Francesco; Saldiva, Paulo; Yorifuji, Takashi; Loomis, Dana.

In: Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 122, No. 9, 2014, p. 906-911.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hamra, GB, Guha, N, Cohen, A, Laden, F, Raaschou-Nielsen, O, Samet, JM, Vineis, P, Forastiere, F, Saldiva, P, Yorifuji, T & Loomis, D 2014, 'Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis', Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 122, no. 9, pp. 906-911. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408092
Hamra, Ghassan B. ; Guha, Neela ; Cohen, Aaron ; Laden, Francine ; Raaschou-Nielsen, Ole ; Samet, Jonathan M. ; Vineis, Paolo ; Forastiere, Francesco ; Saldiva, Paulo ; Yorifuji, Takashi ; Loomis, Dana. / Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer : A systematic review and meta-analysis. In: Environmental Health Perspectives. 2014 ; Vol. 122, No. 9. pp. 906-911.
@article{f97c1a9a733d484c82173dca9f5963d2,
title = "Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Background: Particulate matter (PM) in outdoor air pollution was recently designated a Group I carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). This determination was based on the evidence regarding the relationship of PM2.5 and PM10 to lung cancer risk; however, the IARC evaluation did not include a quantitative summary of the evidence. Objective: Our goal was to provide a systematic review and quantitative summary of the evidence regarding the relationship between PM and lung cancer. Methods: We conducted meta-analyses of studies examining the relationship of exposure to PM2.5 and PM10 with lung cancer incidence and mortality. In total, 18 studies met our inclusion criteria and provided the information necessary to estimate the change in lung cancer risk per 10-μg/m3 increase in exposure to PM. We used random-effects analyses to allow between-study variability to contribute to meta-estimates. Results: The meta-relative risk for lung cancer associated with PM2.5 was 1.09 (95{\%} CI: 1.04, 1.14). The meta-relative risk of lung cancer associated with PM10 was similar, but less precise: 1.08 (95{\%} CI: 1.00, 1.17). Estimates were robust to restriction to studies that considered potential confounders, as well as subanalyses by exposure assessment method. Analyses by smoking status showed that lung cancer risk associated with PM2.5 was greatest for former smokers [1.44 (95{\%} CI: 1.04, 1.22)], followed by never-smokers [1.18 (95{\%} CI: 1.00, 1.39)], and then current smokers [1.06 (95{\%} CI: 0.97, 1.15)]. In addition, meta-estimates for adenocarcinoma associated with PM2.5 and PM10 were 1.40 (95{\%} CI: 1.07, 1.83) and 1.29 (95{\%} CI: 1.02, 1.63), respectively. Conclusion: The results of these analyses, and the decision of the IARC Working Group to classify PM and outdoor air pollution as carcinogenic (Group 1), further justify efforts to reduce exposures to air pollutants that can arise from many sources.",
author = "Hamra, {Ghassan B.} and Neela Guha and Aaron Cohen and Francine Laden and Ole Raaschou-Nielsen and Samet, {Jonathan M.} and Paolo Vineis and Francesco Forastiere and Paulo Saldiva and Takashi Yorifuji and Dana Loomis",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1289/ehp.1408092",
language = "English",
volume = "122",
pages = "906--911",
journal = "Environmental Health Perspectives",
issn = "0091-6765",
publisher = "Public Health Services, US Dept of Health and Human Services",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Hamra, Ghassan B.

AU - Guha, Neela

AU - Cohen, Aaron

AU - Laden, Francine

AU - Raaschou-Nielsen, Ole

AU - Samet, Jonathan M.

AU - Vineis, Paolo

AU - Forastiere, Francesco

AU - Saldiva, Paulo

AU - Yorifuji, Takashi

AU - Loomis, Dana

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: Particulate matter (PM) in outdoor air pollution was recently designated a Group I carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). This determination was based on the evidence regarding the relationship of PM2.5 and PM10 to lung cancer risk; however, the IARC evaluation did not include a quantitative summary of the evidence. Objective: Our goal was to provide a systematic review and quantitative summary of the evidence regarding the relationship between PM and lung cancer. Methods: We conducted meta-analyses of studies examining the relationship of exposure to PM2.5 and PM10 with lung cancer incidence and mortality. In total, 18 studies met our inclusion criteria and provided the information necessary to estimate the change in lung cancer risk per 10-μg/m3 increase in exposure to PM. We used random-effects analyses to allow between-study variability to contribute to meta-estimates. Results: The meta-relative risk for lung cancer associated with PM2.5 was 1.09 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.14). The meta-relative risk of lung cancer associated with PM10 was similar, but less precise: 1.08 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.17). Estimates were robust to restriction to studies that considered potential confounders, as well as subanalyses by exposure assessment method. Analyses by smoking status showed that lung cancer risk associated with PM2.5 was greatest for former smokers [1.44 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.22)], followed by never-smokers [1.18 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.39)], and then current smokers [1.06 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.15)]. In addition, meta-estimates for adenocarcinoma associated with PM2.5 and PM10 were 1.40 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.83) and 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.63), respectively. Conclusion: The results of these analyses, and the decision of the IARC Working Group to classify PM and outdoor air pollution as carcinogenic (Group 1), further justify efforts to reduce exposures to air pollutants that can arise from many sources.

AB - Background: Particulate matter (PM) in outdoor air pollution was recently designated a Group I carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). This determination was based on the evidence regarding the relationship of PM2.5 and PM10 to lung cancer risk; however, the IARC evaluation did not include a quantitative summary of the evidence. Objective: Our goal was to provide a systematic review and quantitative summary of the evidence regarding the relationship between PM and lung cancer. Methods: We conducted meta-analyses of studies examining the relationship of exposure to PM2.5 and PM10 with lung cancer incidence and mortality. In total, 18 studies met our inclusion criteria and provided the information necessary to estimate the change in lung cancer risk per 10-μg/m3 increase in exposure to PM. We used random-effects analyses to allow between-study variability to contribute to meta-estimates. Results: The meta-relative risk for lung cancer associated with PM2.5 was 1.09 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.14). The meta-relative risk of lung cancer associated with PM10 was similar, but less precise: 1.08 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.17). Estimates were robust to restriction to studies that considered potential confounders, as well as subanalyses by exposure assessment method. Analyses by smoking status showed that lung cancer risk associated with PM2.5 was greatest for former smokers [1.44 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.22)], followed by never-smokers [1.18 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.39)], and then current smokers [1.06 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.15)]. In addition, meta-estimates for adenocarcinoma associated with PM2.5 and PM10 were 1.40 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.83) and 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.63), respectively. Conclusion: The results of these analyses, and the decision of the IARC Working Group to classify PM and outdoor air pollution as carcinogenic (Group 1), further justify efforts to reduce exposures to air pollutants that can arise from many sources.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84906888008&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84906888008&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1289/ehp.1408092

DO - 10.1289/ehp.1408092

M3 - Article

C2 - 24911630

AN - SCOPUS:84906888008

VL - 122

SP - 906

EP - 911

JO - Environmental Health Perspectives

JF - Environmental Health Perspectives

SN - 0091-6765

IS - 9

ER -