Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma.
Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.pathophys.2012.11.001
复制
发表时间：
2013-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hansson Mild, Kjell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hardell, Lennart;Carlberg, Michael;Hansson Mild, Kjell
2011年5月24日至31日在法国里昂举行的会议期间，世卫组织国际癌症研究机构对射频电磁场对人类的致癌作用进行了评估。工作组由30名科学家组成，并将来自移动电话和其他发出类似非电离电磁场（RF-EMF）的设备的射频电磁场归类为2B组，即“可能的”人类致癌物。关于手机的决定主要基于瑞典哈德尔小组的研究以及国际癌症研究机构对讲机的研究。我们概述了目前流行病学证据表明脑肿瘤风险增加，包括哈德尔小组的荟萃分析和手机使用对讲机的结果。对讲机对无绳电话的研究结果缺乏。meta分析显示，脑胶质瘤发生在大脑最暴露部位颞叶，潜伏期≥10年（Hardell组为10年）组的优势比(OR)=1.71, 95%可信区间(CI)=1.04-2.81。同侧手机总使用时间≥1640h， OR=2.29, 95% CI=1.56 ~ 3.37。脑膜瘤的结果OR=1.25, 95% CI=0.31 ~ 4.98， OR=1.35, 95% CI=0.81 ~ 2.23。对于听神经瘤同侧手机使用潜伏期≥10年组，OR=1.81, 95% CI=0.73-4.45。同侧累计使用≥1640h OR=2.55, 95% CI=1.50-4.40。在哈德尔小组的研究中，使用无绳电话也增加了患神经胶质瘤和听神经瘤的风险。在Hardell组的研究中分析了神经胶质瘤患者的生存率，发现使用无线电话的10年潜伏期风险比(HR)=1.2, 95% CI=1.002-1.5。这一增加的HR是基于WHO IV级星形细胞瘤（多形性胶质母细胞瘤）的结果。低级别星形细胞瘤的HR降低，WHO分级为I-II级，这可能是由于RF-EMF暴露导致肿瘤相关症状，早期发现和手术预后较好。一些研究表明脑肿瘤的发病率在增加，而另一些研究则没有。结论是，在分析流行病学中，应谨慎使用发病率数据来否定结果。国际癌症研究机构的致癌物分类似乎没有对各国政府对保护公众健康免受这种广泛辐射源影响的责任的看法产生任何重大影响。
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at WHO evaluation of the carcinogenic effect of RF-EMF on humans took place during a 24-31 May 2011 meeting at Lyon in France. The Working Group consisted of 30 scientists and categorised the radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from mobile phones, and from other devices that emit similar non-ionising electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF), as Group 2B, i.e., a 'possible', human carcinogen. The decision on mobile phones was based mainly on the Hardell group of studies from Sweden and the IARC Interphone study. We give an overview of current epidemiological evidence for an increased risk for brain tumours including a meta-analysis of the Hardell group and Interphone results for mobile phone use. Results for cordless phones are lacking in Interphone. The meta-analysis gave for glioma in the most exposed part of the brain, the temporal lobe, odds ratio (OR)=1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.04-2.81 in the ≥10 years (>10 years in the Hardell group) latency group. Ipsilateral mobile phone use ≥1640h in total gave OR=2.29, 95% CI=1.56-3.37. The results for meningioma were OR=1.25, 95% CI=0.31-4.98 and OR=1.35, 95% CI=0.81-2.23, respectively. Regarding acoustic neuroma ipsilateral mobile phone use in the latency group ≥10 years gave OR=1.81, 95% CI=0.73-4.45. For ipsilateral cumulative use ≥1640h OR=2.55, 95% CI=1.50-4.40 was obtained. Also use of cordless phones increased the risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma in the Hardell group studies. Survival of patients with glioma was analysed in the Hardell group studies yielding in the >10 years latency period hazard ratio (HR)=1.2, 95% CI=1.002-1.5 for use of wireless phones. This increased HR was based on results for astrocytoma WHO grade IV (glioblastoma multiforme). Decreased HR was found for low-grade astrocytoma, WHO grades I-II, which might be caused by RF-EMF exposure leading to tumour-associated symptoms and earlier detection and surgery with better prognosis. Some studies show increasing incidence of brain tumours whereas other studies do not. It is concluded that one should be careful using incidence data to dismiss results in analytical epidemiology. The IARC carcinogenic classification does not seem to have had any significant impact on governments' perceptions of their responsibilities to protect public health from this widespread source of radiation.