Study type: Epidemiological study (observational study)

Pooled analysis of case-control studies on acoustic neuroma diagnosed 1997-2003 and 2007-2009 and use of mobile and cordless phones. epidem.

Published in: Int J Oncol 2013; 43 (4): 1036-1044

Aim of study (acc. to author)

A pooled analysis of case-control studies on acoustic neuroma and use of mobile phones and cordless phones was conducted in Sweden.

Further details

Following studies are included: The first case-control study covering the period 1997-2000 was published in the publications Hardell et al (2002) and Hardell et al (2003). The second study covering the period 2000-2003 was published in Hardell et al (2005) concerning benign brain tumors and in Hardell et al (2006) concerning malignant brain tumors. A pooled analysis of these studies is published in Hardell et al (2006). The new case-control study on benign brain tumors was conducted in the period 2007-2009. The results of this new study on meningioma are published in Carlberg et al (2013).

Endpoint/type of risk estimation

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

Exposure

Assessment

Exposure groups

Group Description
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 year latency period
Group 8 digital (2G) mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 9 digital (2G) mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 10 digital (2G) mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 11 digital (2G) mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 12 digital (2G) mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 13 digital (2G) mobile phone > 20 -year latency period
Group 14 digital (3G) mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 15 digital (3G) mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 16 digital (3G) mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 17 digital (3G) mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 18 digital (3G) mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 19 digital (3G) mobile phone > 20-year latency period
Group 20 mobile phone > 1 year latency period
Group 21 mobile phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 22 mobile phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 23 mobile phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 24 mobile phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 25 mobile phone > 20 -year latency period
Group 26 cordless phone > 1 year latency period
Group 27 cordless phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 28 cordless phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 29 cordless phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 30 cordless phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 31 cordless phone > 20-year latency period
Group 32 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 1 year latency period
Group 33 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 34 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 35 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 36 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 37 digital phone (2G, 3G and/or cordless phone) > 20-year latency period
Group 38 mobile phone + cordless phone > 1 year latency period
Group 39 mobile phone + cordless phone > 1- to 5-year latency period
Group 40 mobile phone + cordless phone > 5- to 10-year latency period
Group 41 mobile phone + cordless phone > 10- to 15-year latency period
Group 42 mobile phone + cordless phone > 15- to 20-year latency period
Group 43 mobile phone + cordless phone > 20-year latency period

Population

Case group

Control group

Study size

Cases Controls
Eligible 338 4,038
Participants 316 3,530
Participation rate 93 % 87 %
Statistical analysis method: (adjustment: )

Conclusion (acc. to author)

The main result of this study was an association between use of wireless phones (mobile phones and cordless phones) and acoustic neuroma. Increased risk was found for all studied phone types with the highest odds ratios in the longest latency period (see table above). Several of the calculations in the long latency category were based on low numbers of exposed cases. Formally, the highest odds ratio overall was calculated for digital mobile phones of the third generation of mobile communication systems (3G), but this result was not statistically significant and was based on low numbers of exposed cases. Ipsilateral use resulted in a higher risk than contralateral for both mobile phones and cordless phones. OR increased per 100 h cumulative use and per year of latency for mobile phones and cordless phones, though the increase was not statistically significant for cordless phones. The percentage tumor volume increased per year of latency and per 100 h of cumulative use, statistically significant for analogue phones.
The authors concluded that this study confirmed previous results demonstrating an association between mobile phone and cordless phone use and acoustic neuroma.

Study funded by

Related articles