The Association between Ambient Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Lung Cancer Incidence: Results from the AHSMOG-2 Study

Abstract

Background:There is a positive association between ambient fine particulate matter ≤ 2.5 μm in aerodynamic diameter (PM2.5) and incidence and mortality of lung cancer (LC), but few studies have assessed the relationship between ambient PM2.5 and LC among never smokers.Objectives:We assessed the association between PM2.5 and risk of LC using the Adventist Health and Smog Study-2 (AHSMOG-2), a cohort of health conscious nonsmokers where 81% have never smoked.Methods:A total of 80,285 AHSMOG-2 participants were followed for an average of 7.5 years with respect to incident LC identified through linkage with U.S. state cancer registries. Estimates of ambient air pollution levels at participants’ residences were obtained for 2000 and 2001, the years immediately prior to the start of the study.Results:A total of 250 incident LC cases occurred during 598,927 person-years of follow-up. For each 10-μg/m3 increment in PM2.5, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for LC incidence was 1.43 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.84) in the two-pollutant multivariable model with ozone. Among those who spent > 1 hr/day outdoors or who had lived 5 or more years at their enrollment address, the HR was 1.68 (95% CI: 1.28, 2.22) and 1.54 (95% CI: 1.17, 2.04), respectively.Conclusion:Increased risk estimates of LC were observed for each 10-μg/m3 increment in ambient PM2.5 concentration. The estimate was higher among those with longer residence at enrollment address and those who spent > 1 hr/day outdoors.Citation:Gharibvand L, Shavlik D, Ghamsary M, Beeson WL, Soret S, Knutsen R, Knutsen SF. 2017. The association between ambient fine particulate air pollution and lung cancer incidence: results from the AHSMOG-2 study. Environ Health Perspect 125:378–384; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP124Citation: Gharibvand L, Shavlik D, Ghamsary M, Beeson WL, Soret S, Knutsen R, Knutsen SF. 2017. The association between ambient fine particulate air pollution and lung cancer incidence: results from the AHSMOG-2 study. Environ Health Perspect 125:378–384; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP124

Exposure to ambient air pollution and the incidence of lung cancer and breast cancer in the Ontario Population Health and Environment Cohort

“…conducted in North America and Europe that typically contained a small number of cases (with lung cancer cases ranging from 250 to 2,309), 7-10,41-43 which showed the increases in incident lung cancer per 10 μg /m 3 increase in PM 2.5 exposure varying from 6% to 43%, but was higher than that from a study in Netherlands (HR: 0.81; 1,940 cases). 8 These differences might be due to inherent difference in the characteristics of study subjects (e.g., females, 41,42 males, 43 nonsmokers 10 and general populations [7][8][9] ), different study designs (i.e., case-control 7 and cohort design [8][9][10][40][41][42][43] ), possible differences in the assessment of outcomes and PM 2.5 (e.g., land use regression models 9 and spatiotemporal interpolation methods 7,10,42 ), and differences in the sources and compositions of PM 2.5 , or chance. Interestingly, we found a somewhat strong association between lung cancer and NO 2 exposure (HR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.03-1.07 for every 14 ppb increase in NO 2 ).…”

Ambient PM 2.5 exposure and risk of lung cancer incidence in North America and Europe

“…Six studies met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Four of these were based in North American study populations [23][24][25][26] with two studies based in European study populations [27,28]. The European study by Beelen and colleagues (2008) [29] was excluded, because updated results on that cohort with extended follow up time was provided in the later published study by Hart and colleagues (2015) [28].…”

Evaluating the Sensitivity of the Mass-Based Particle Removal Calculations for HVAC Filters in ISO 16890 to Assumptions for Aerosol Distributions

“…Finally, estimates of ePM 1 , ePM 2.5 , and ePM 10 were made by dividing the "downstream" mass concentrations by the "upstream" mass concentrations for each of the three size classifications, and subtracting that term from unity, as shown in Equations (11)- (13).…”

“…Removal efficiencies in the three size bins are then used to assign HVAC filters a single efficiency metric, which is the minimum efficiency reporting value (MERV), and is based on the minimum removal efficiency in each of the three bins. Although the vast majority of the epidemiological evidence of adverse health outcomes that are associated with airborne particulate matter to date has been linked to mass-based concentrations of PM 1 , PM 2.5 , and PM 10 [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20], the ASHRAE Standard 52.2 test method does not explicitly evaluate particle removal efficiency for any of these mass-based measures.…”