Due to a lack of financial resources, we unfortunately have to suspend the import of any new radio frequency and mobile phone-related articles as of now (November 27, 2017). We apologize for this inconvenience and will keep you informed.
Home
Epidemiological study (observational study)

Meningioma patients diagnosed 2007--2009 and the association with use of mobile and cordless phones: a case-control study.

Published in: Environ Health 2013; 12 (1): 60

Aim of study (acc. to author)

A case-control study was conducted in Sweden to investigate the association between use of mobile phones and cordless phones and meningioma.

Further details

The unexposed group was defined as following: no use of mobile phone or cordless phone or less than 1 year between first use and year of diagnosis or cumulative use less than 39 hours.

Endpoint/type of risk estimation

Type of risk estimation:
  • incidence
(odds ratio (OR))

Exposure

Assessment

Exposure groups

Reference group 1 unexposed
Group 2 analog mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 3 analog mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 4 analog mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 5 analog mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 6 analog mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 7 analog mobile phone > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 8 analog mobile phone ≥ 25-year latency period
Group 9 digital (2G) mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 10 digital (2G) mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 11 digital (2G) mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 12 digital (2G) mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 13 digital (2G) mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 14 digital (2G) mobile phone > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 15 digital (2G) mobile phone ≥ 25-year latency period
Group 16 digital (3G) mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 17 digital (3G) mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 18 digital (3G) mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 19 digital (3G) mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 20 digital (3G) mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 21 digital (3G) mobile phone > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 22 digital (3G) mobile phone ≥ 25-year latency period
Group 23 mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 24 mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 25 mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 26 mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 27 mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 28 mobile phone > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 29 mobile phone ≥ 25-year latency period
Group 30 cordless phone > 1 year latency period
Group 31 cordless phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 32 cordless phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 33 cordless phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 34 cordless phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 35 cordless phone > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 36 cordless phone ≥ 25-year latency period
Group 37 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 1 year latency period
Group 38 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 39 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 40 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 41 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 42 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 43 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) ≥ 25-year latency period
Group 44 wireless phone > 1 year latency period
Group 45 wireless phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 46 wireless phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 47 wireless phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 48 wireless phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 49 wireless phone > 20- to 25 -year latency period
Group 50 wireless phone ≥ 25-year latency period

Population

  • Group:
    • men
    • women
  • Age: 18–75 years
  • Observation period: 2007 - 2009
  • Study location: Sweden

Case group

Control group

  • Selection:
    • population-based
  • Matching:
    • sex
    • 5-year age groups

Study size

Cases Controls
Eligible 1,039 1,601
Contacted 920 -
Participants 814 1,368
Participation rate 88 % 85 %
Other: 709 meningioma cases, 105 other benign brain tumor cases
Statistical analysis method:
  • unconditional logistic regression
( adjustment: )

Conclusion (acc. to author)

No overall association between use of mobile phones (OR 1.0; CI 0.7-1.4) and cordless phones (OR 1.1; CI 0.8-1.5)and meningioma was found. The risk increased statistically significant per 100 h of cumulative use and highest OR (1.4; CI 0.9-2.0) was found in the fourth quartile (>2,376 hours) of cumulative use for all studied phone types. There was no statistically significant increased risk for ipsilateral mobile or cordless phone use, for meningioma in the temporal lobe or per year of latency. Tumor volume was not related to latency or cumulative use in hours of wireless phones.
The authors reasoned that no conclusive evidence of an association between use of mobile phones and cordless phones and meningioma was found. An indication of increased risk was seen in the group with highest cumulative use but was not supported by statistically significant increasing risk with latency.

Study funded by

  • Cancer och Allergifonden (Cancer and Allergy Foundation), Sweden
  • Cancerhjälpen (Cancerhelp), Sweden
  • Örebro University Hospital Cancer Fund, Sweden
  • Environmental Health Trust
  • gigaherz.ch (Schweizerische Interessengemeinschaft Elektrosmog-Betroffener), Switzerland
  • Lions
  • Pandora Foundation, Germany

Related articles