Farm residence and lymphohematopoietic cancers in the Iowa Women's Health Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence in male farmers has been studied extensively; however, less is known about risk among women residing on farms or in agricultural areas, who may be exposed to pesticides by their proximity to crop fields. We extended a previous follow-up of the Iowa Women's Health Study cohort to examine farm residence and the incidence of lymphohematopoietic cancers. Further, we investigated crop acreage within 750 m of residences, which has been associated with higher herbicide levels in Iowa homes. METHODS: We analyzed data for a cohort of 37,099 Iowa women aged 55-69 years who reported their residence location (farm, rural (not a farm), town size based on population) at enrollment in 1986. We identified incident lymphohematopoietic cancers (1986-2009) by linkage with the Iowa Cancer Registry. Using a geographic information system, we geocoded addresses and calculated acreage of pasture and row crops within 750 m of homes using the 1992 National Land Cover Database. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) in multivariate analyses of cancer risk in relation to both residence location and crop acreage. RESULTS: As found in an earlier analysis of residence location, risk of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was higher among women living on farms (HR=2.23, 95%CI: 1.25-3.99) or rural areas (but not on a farm) (HR=1.95, 95%CI: 0.89-4.29) compared with women living in towns of >10,000 population. We observed no association between farm or rural residence and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL; overall or for major subtypes) or multiple myeloma. In analyses of crop acreage, we observed no association between pasture or row crop acreage within 750 m of homes and risk of leukemia overall or for the AML subtype. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) risk was nonsignificantly elevated among women with pasture acreage within 750 m of their home (HRs for increasing tertiles=1.8, 1.8 and 1.5) and with row crop acreage within 750 m (HRs for increasing tertiles of acreage=1.4, 1.5 and 1.6) compared to women with no pasture or row crop acreage, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Iowa women living on a farm or in a rural area were at increased risk of developing AML, which was not related to crop acreage near the home. Living near pasture or row crops may confer an increased risk of CLL/SLL regardless of residence location. Further investigation of specific farm-related exposures and these cancers among women living on farms and in agricultural areas is warranted.

Residential proximity to industrial combustion facilities and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Residence near municipal solid waste incinerators, a major historical source of dioxin emissions, has been associated with increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in European studies. The aim of our study was to evaluate residence near industrial combustion facilities and estimates of dioxin emissions in relation to NHL risk in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-control study of NHL (1998-2000) in four National Cancer Institute-Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results centers (Detroit, Iowa, Los Angeles, Seattle). Residential histories 15 years before diagnosis (similar date for controls) were linked to an Environmental Protection Agency database of dioxin-emitting facilities for 969 cases and 749 controls. We evaluated proximity (3 and 5 km) to 10 facility types that accounted for >85% of U.S. emissions and a distance-weighted average emission index (AEI [ng toxic equivalency quotient (TEQ)/year]). RESULTS: Proximity to any dioxin-emitting facility was not associated with NHL risk (3 km OR = 1.0, 95% CI 0.8-1.3). Risk was elevated for residence near cement kilns (5 km OR = 1.7, 95% CI 0.8-3.3; 3 km OR = 3.8, 95% CI 1.1-14.0) and reduced for residence near municipal solid waste incinerators (5 km OR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.9; 3 km OR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-1.4). The AEI was not associated with risk of NHL overall. Risk for marginal zone lymphoma was increased for the highest versus lowest quartile (5 km OR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.0-6.8; 3 km OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.1-8.3). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found no association with residential exposure to dioxins and NHL risk. However, findings for high emissions and marginal zone lymphoma and for specific facility types and all NHL provide some evidence of an association and deserve future study.

Estimating water supply arsenic levels in the New England Bladder Cancer Study.

BACKGROUND: Ingestion of inorganic arsenic in drinking water is recognized as a cause of bladder cancer when levels are relatively high (≥ 150 µg/L). The epidemiologic evidence is less clear at the low-to-moderate concentrations typically observed in the United States. Accurate retrospective exposure assessment over a long time period is a major challenge in conducting epidemiologic studies of environmental factors and diseases with long latency, such as cancer. OBJECTIVE: We estimated arsenic concentrations in the water supplies of 2,611 participants in a population-based case-control study in northern New England. METHODS: Estimates covered the lifetimes of most study participants and were based on a combination of arsenic measurements at the homes of the participants and statistical modeling of arsenic concentrations in the water supply of both past and current homes. We assigned a residential water supply arsenic concentration for 165,138 (95%) of the total 173,361 lifetime exposure years (EYs) and a workplace water supply arsenic level for 85,195 EYs (86% of reported occupational years). RESULTS: Three methods accounted for 93% of the residential estimates of arsenic concentration: direct measurement of water samples (27%; median, 0.3 µg/L; range, 0.1-11.5), statistical models of water utility measurement data (49%; median, 0.4 µg/L; range, 0.3-3.3), and statistical models of arsenic concentrations in wells using aquifers in New England (17%; median, 1.6 µg/L; range, 0.6-22.4). CONCLUSIONS: We used a different validation procedure for each of the three methods, and found our estimated levels to be comparable with available measured concentrations. This methodology allowed us to calculate potential drinking water exposure over long periods.

Positional accuracy of two methods of geocoding.

BACKGROUND: Geocoding is often used in epidemiologic studies to map residences with geographic information systems (GIS). The accuracy of the method is usually not determined. METHODS: We collected global positioning system (GPS) measurements at homes in a case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Iowa. We geocoded the addresses by 2 methods: (1) in-house, using ArcView 3.2 software and the U.S. Census Bureau TIGER 2000 street database; and (2) automated geocoding by a commercial firm. We calculated the distance between the geocoded and GPS location (positional error) overall and separately for homes within towns and outside (rural). We evaluated the error in classifying homes with respect to their proximity to crop fields. RESULTS: Overall, the majority of homes were geocoded with positional errors of less than 100 m by both methods (ArcView/TIGER 2000, median = 62 m [interquartile range = 39-103]; commercial firm, median = 61 m [interquartile range = 35-137]). For town residences, the percent geocoded with errors of