Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26792203›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2016

Occupational exposure to magnetic fields and breast cancer among Canadian men.

Anne Grundy, Shelley A Harris, Paul A Demers, Kenneth C Johnson, David A Agnew, Canadian Cancer Registries Epidemiology Research Group, Paul J Villeneuve

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Heliyon · 2023
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Breast cancer and occupational exposures: an integrative review of the literature.Revista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT · 2021
    Review
  4. Dietary Isoflavones and Breast Cancer Risk.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017
    Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anne GrundyDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services - Cancer Control Alberta, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Shelley A HarrisPrevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2306-7921
Paul A DemersOccupational Cancer Research Center, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Kenneth C JohnsonDepartment of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
David A AgnewUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada.
Canadian Cancer Registries Epidemiology Research Group
Paul J VilleneuveDepartment of Health Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Occupational magnetic field (MF) exposure has been suggested as a risk factor for breast cancer in both men and women. Due to the rarity of this disease in men, most epidemiologic studies investigating this relationship have been limited by small sample sizes. Herein, associations of several measures of occupational MF exposure with breast cancer in men were investigated using data from the population-based case-control component of the Canadian National Enhanced Cancer Surveillance System. Lifetime job histories were provided by 115 cases and 570 controls. Average MF exposure of individual jobs was classified into three categories (<0.3, 0.3 to <0.6, or ≥0.6 μT) through expert blinded review of participant's lifetime occupational histories. The impact of highest average and cumulative MF exposure, as well as exposure duration and specific exposure-time windows, on cancer risk was examined using logistic regression. The proportion of cases (25%) with a highest average exposure of ≥0.3 μT was higher than among controls (22%). We found an elevated risk of breast cancer in men who were exposed to ≥0.6 μT (odds ratio [OR] = 1.80, 95% CI = 0.82-3.95) when compared to those with exposures <0.3 μT. Those exposed to occupational MF fields for at least 30 years had a nearly threefold increase in risk of breast cancer (OR = 2.77, 95% CI = 0.98-7.82) when compared to those with background levels of exposure. Findings for the other time-related MF variables were inconsistent. Our analysis, in one of the largest case-control studies of breast cancer in men conducted to date, provides limited support for the hypothesis that exposure to MF increases the risk breast cancer in men.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBreast Neoplasms, MaleCanadaCase-Control StudiesHumansLogistic ModelsMagnetic FieldsMaleMiddle AgedOccupational ExposureOdds RatioCase-control studymagnetic fieldsmale breast canceroccupational exposure

Identifiers

PMID26792203
PMCPMC4799956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.