Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28480506›Full record

ArticleCancer2017

County-level cumulative environmental quality associated with cancer incidence.

Jyotsna S Jagai, Lynne C Messer, Kristen M Rappazzo, Christine L Gray, Shannon C Grabich, Danelle T Lobdell

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Relationship between Urban Green Spaces and Cancer: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Environmental Quality and Invasive Breast Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020
    Article
  18. Cancer rates not explained by smoking: a county-level analysis.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jyotsna S JagaiSchool of Public Health, Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Lynne C MesserSchool of Community Health, College of Urban and Public Affairs, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon.
Kristen M RappazzoUS Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Christine L GrayGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Shannon C GrabichGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Danelle T LobdellUS Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Environmental Protection Agency · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USPortland State University · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividual environmental exposures are associated with cancer development; however, environmental exposures occur simultaneously. The Environmental Quality Index (EQI) is a county-level measure of cumulative environmental exposures that occur in 5 domains.

methodsThe EQI was linked to county-level annual age-adjusted cancer incidence rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program state cancer profiles. All-site cancer and the top 3 site-specific cancers for male and female subjects were considered. Incident rate differences (IRDs; annual rate difference per 100,000 persons) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed-slope, random intercept multilevel linear regression models. Associations were assessed with domain-specific indices and analyses were stratified by rural/urban status.

resultsComparing the highest quintile/poorest environmental quality with the lowest quintile/best environmental quality for overall EQI, all-site county-level cancer incidence rate was positively associated with poor environmental quality overall (IRD, 38.55; 95% CI, 29.57-47.53) and for male (IRD, 32.60; 95% CI, 16.28-48.91) and female (IRD, 30.34; 95% CI, 20.47-40.21) subjects, indicating a potential increase in cancer incidence with decreasing environmental quality. Rural/urban stratified models demonstrated positive associations comparing the highest with the lowest quintiles for all strata, except the thinly populated/rural stratum and in the metropolitan/urbanized stratum. Prostate and breast cancer demonstrated the strongest positive associations with poor environmental quality.

conclusionWe observed strong positive associations between the EQI and all-site cancer incidence rates, and associations differed by rural/urban status and environmental domain. Research focusing on single environmental exposures in cancer development may not address the broader environmental context in which cancers develop, and future research should address cumulative environmental exposures. Cancer 2017;123:2901-8. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Indexed as

Air PollutionEnvironmentWater QualityBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsEnvironmental ExposureFemaleHumansIncidenceLinear ModelsLung NeoplasmsMaleMultilevel AnalysisNeoplasmsProstatic NeoplasmsRural Populationairall-site cancerbuiltcumulative environmental exposureslandsociodemographicwater

Identifiers

PMID28480506
PMCPMC6121813
OpenAlexW2613925074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.