Geographic Studies of Pediatric Cancer near Hazardous Waste Sites

Abstract

The incidence of pediatric (i.e., 0-17 y of age) cancers in North Carolina was studied for the years 1990-1993 in counties and ZIP-code areas that contained a National Priorities List hazardous-waste site. We analyzed the areas to determine if there was an excess incidence of cancer among the pediatric population. We used geographic information systems technology to address-match and map the cancer cases, along with county and National Priorities List hazardous waste-site location. No significantly elevated cancer incidence rates were found at the county level. Two ZIP-code areas had statistically significant elevations in cancer incidence (p < .05). Only 3 of the cancer cases we mapped resided within a 1.6-km (1 mi) buffer zone of a National Priorities List hazardous-waste site. These 3 cases were not in the ZIP-code areas that had increased incidence rates. The small numerators throughout the study led us to question the accuracy of the assessment of underlying rates. The general capabilities of the geographic information systems, as well as advantages and limitations of the system, are discussed. As an exploratory study, this study serves as a springboard into more in-depth environmental-health hypotheses and more-specific investigations of point sources of hazardous exposures.

Integrating the geographic information system into cancer research

“…White and Aldrich (1999) provide an example of purposeful aggregation in a study on pediatric cancer. [20] The authors defined zones based on a onemile buffer around hazardous waste sites, because of their interest in the proximity to environmental toxins as a risk factor for pediatric cancer. By defining zones according to different types of environmental exposure, different hypotheses about environmental risk factors could be explored.…”

“…The investigator can overlay the distribution or cases and / or controls (represented by points) with the distribution of environmental features (represented by polygons) to generate hypotheses about risk factors, which can then be studied further at the individual level with traditional epidemiological study designs such as cohort or case control (Turnbull, Iwano, Burnett, Howe and Clark, 1990). [3,[23][24] An example of an overlay is given by the study of White and Aldrich (1999), in which the authors have mapped pediatric cancer cases and overlaid buffer zones around the National Priorities List (NPL) sites. [20] Spatial analysis Spatial analysis builds on the results of visualization and examines whether visualized patterns or relationships occur by chance.…”

“…[3,[23][24] An example of an overlay is given by the study of White and Aldrich (1999), in which the authors have mapped pediatric cancer cases and overlaid buffer zones around the National Priorities List (NPL) sites. [20] Spatial analysis Spatial analysis builds on the results of visualization and examines whether visualized patterns or relationships occur by chance. Although many types of spatial analysis are possible with GIS, its application to cancer has primarily been in testing for clustering of cancer cases.…”

Untitled

“…Limitations of these monitoring data for cancer studies include the limited historical measurement data. A few studies have evaluated cancer incidence among those potentially exposed to hazardous waste sites [96] or municipal waste sites and incinerators [97,98]. …”

Environmental Exposures at Birth and at Menarche and Risk of Breast Cancer

“…(2,4,5,6). Topographically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER) and GDT/Dynamap database are all datasets commonly used to geocode addresses.…”