SynthesisOncotarget2017
Relationship between exposure to PM2.5 and lung cancer incidence and mortality: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
88 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Long-term exposure to elemental carbon and disease incidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2025Pooled it
- Physical Activity, Air Pollution, and Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2025Pooled it
- Assessing the Global Impact of Ambient Air Pollution on Cancer Incidence and Mortality: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.JCO global oncology · 2024Pooled it
- The long-term effect of exposure to respirable particulate matter on the incidence of myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis study.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Pooled it
- Review
- Breathing carcinogens: PMJournal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Neighborhood geographic disparities in colorectal, prostate, breast, and lung cancer risk in Alabama.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Health Risk and Pathogenesis of PMToxics · 2026Review
- Trends and oscillation characteristics of hourly PMScientific reports · 2026Article
- Global disparities in lifetime risk of lung cancer: links to socioeconomic development, smoking, and fine particulate matter from GLOBOCAN 2022.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Molecular mechanisms of air pollution-induced carcinogenesis and the emerging role of microplastics.Human genomics · 2025Review
- Long-term exposure to PMThe Lancet. Planetary health · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Health damages and disparities from municipal and medical waste incineration in Baltimore, USA.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Associations between commuting modes and risk of 16 site-specific cancers in the UK Biobank.International journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessment of disease burden and mortality attributable to air pollutants in northwestern Iran using the AirQ+ software.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Update in Association between Lung Cancer and Air Pollution.Tuberculosis and respiratory diseases · 2025Article
28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a meta-analysis to examinine the relationship between exposure to PM2.5 and lung cancer incidence and mortality. In total, 17 studies met our inclusion criteria and provided information necessary to estimate the change in lung cancer risk per 10 μg/m3 increase in exposure to PM2.5. The random-effects model was used to estimate the relative risk (RR) for specific PM2.5 values. The meta-estimate for lung cancer risk associated with PM2.5 was 1.11 for mortality (95% CI: 1.05, 1.18) and 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.12) for incidence. Analyses by continent showed that the meta-estimate for lung cancer mortality associated with PM2.5 was greatest in North America [1.15 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.24)], followed by Asia [1.12 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.35)], and then Europe [1.05 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.10)]. Lung cancer incidence associated with PM2.5 was greatest in Asia [1.09 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.15)], followed by North America [1.06 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.11)], and then Europe [1.03 (95% CI: 0.61, 1.75)]. In subgroup analyses of country, the mortality meta-estimate for developed countries was 1.14 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.23), and for developing countries was 1.03 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.07). The incidence meta-estimate for developed countries was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.20), and was similar to that of developing countries, 1.07 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.09). In subgroup analyses of males and females, the meta-estimate for lung cancer mortality associated with PM2.5 was greater for males [1.26 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.40)] than for females [1.17 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.39)]. The meta-estimate for lung cancer incidence associated with PM2.5 was greater for males [1.23 (95% CI: 0.83, 1.81)] than for females [1.15 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.18)]. In subgroup analyses of smoking status, the meta-estimate for lung cancer mortality associated with PM2.5 for former smokers was 1.46 (95% CI: 0.84, 2.55), for current smokers was 1.33 (95% CI: 1.20, 1.49), and for never smokers was 1.16 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.33), respectively. The meta-estimate for lung cancer incidence associated with PM2.5 for former smokers was 1.19 (95% CI: 0.95, 1.50), for never smokers was 1.10 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.59), and for current smokers was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.87, 1.21). The relative risks of a relationship between PM2.5 and lung cancer incidence and mortality were 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.12) and 1.11 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.18), respectively. These findings will provide some evidence for policy makers and public health practitioners worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.