Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33761274›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2021

An Examination of National Cancer Risk Based on Monitored Hazardous Air Pollutants.

Chelsea A Weitekamp, McKayla Lein, Madeleine Strum, Mark Morris, Ted Palma, Darcie Smith, Lukas Kerr, Michael J Stewart

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chelsea A WeitekampCenter for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
McKayla LeinCenter for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Madeleine StrumAir Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Mark MorrisHealth and Environmental Impacts Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Ted PalmaHealth and Environmental Impacts Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Darcie SmithHealth and Environmental Impacts Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Lukas KerrCenter for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Michael J StewartCenter for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Environmental Protection Agency · USOak Ridge Associated Universities · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHazardous air pollutants, or air toxics, are pollutants known to cause cancer or other serious health effects. Nationwide cancer risk from these pollutants is estimated by the U.S. EPA National Air Toxics Assessment. However, these model estimates are limited to the totality of the emissions inventory used as inputs, and further, they cannot be used to examine spatial and temporal trends in cancer risk from hazardous air pollutants.

objectivesTo complement model estimates of nationwide cancer risk, we examined trends in cancer risk using monitoring data from 2013 to 2017 across the 27 U.S. National Air Toxics Trends Stations.

methodsFor each monitoring site, we estimated cancer risk by multiplying the annual concentration for each monitored pollutant by its corresponding unit risk estimate. We examined the 5-y average (2013-2017) cancer risk across sites and the population levels and demographics within 1-mi of the monitors, as well as changes in estimated cancer risk over time. Finally, we examined changes in individual pollutant concentrations and their patterns of covariance.

resultsWe found that the total estimated cancer risk is higher for urban vs. rural sites, with the risk at seven urban sites (of 21) above 75 in 1 million. Furthermore, while most pollutant concentrations have not changed over the time period explored, we found 38 site-pollutant combinations that significantly declined and 12 that significantly increased between 2013 and 2017. We also identified a positive correlation between estimated cancer risk and percent of the population within 1-mi of a monitor that is low income. DISCUSSION: Long-term trends show that annual mean concentrations of most measured air toxics have declined. Our evaluation of a more recent snapshot in time finds that most pollutant concentrations have not changed from 2013 to 2017. This analysis of cancer risk based on monitored values provides an important complement to modeled nationwide cancer risk estimates and can further inform future approaches to mitigate risk from exposure to hazardous air pollutants. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8044.

Indexed as

Air PollutantsAir PollutionNeoplasmsEnvironmental MonitoringHumansAir Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID33761274
PMCPMC7990519
OpenAlexW3139479987

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.