Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 657

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case–control study

The INTERPHONE Study Group·2010·International Journal of Epidemiology
DOI 10.1093/ije/dyq079
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in mobile telephone use has generated concern about possible health risks related to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from this technology. METHODS: An interview-based case-control study with 2708 glioma and 2409 meningioma cases and matched controls was conducted in 13 countries using a common protocol. RESULTS: A reduced odds ratio (OR) related to ever having been a regular mobile phone user was seen for glioma [OR 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.94] and meningioma (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.68-0.91), possibly reflecting participation bias or other methodological limitations. No elevated OR was observed > or =10 years after first phone use (glioma: OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.76-1.26; meningioma: OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.61-1.14). ORs were <1.0 for all deciles of lifetime number of phone calls and nine deciles of cumulative call time. In the 10th decile of recalled cumulative call time, > or =1640 h, the OR was 1.40 (95% CI 1.03-1.89) for glioma, and 1.15 (95% CI 0.81-1.62) for meningioma; but there are implausible values of reported use in this group. ORs for glioma tended to be greater in the temporal lobe than in other lobes of the brain, but the CIs around the lobe-specific estimates were wide. ORs for glioma tended to be greater in subjects who reported usual phone use on the same side of the head as their tumour than on the opposite side. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with use of mobile phones. There were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma at the highest exposure levels, but biases and error prevent a causal interpretation. The possible effects of long-term heavy use of mobile phones require further investigation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ije/dyq079

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 41

  1. Bernhardt, 1997, Non-thermal effects of RF electromagnetic fields
  2. McKinlay, 1997, Possible health effects related to the use of radiotelephones - recommendations of a European Commission Expert Group, Radiol Protect Bull, 187, 9
  3. Repacholi, 1998, Low-level exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: health effects and research needs (Review article), Bioelectromagnetics, 19, 1, 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1998)19:1<1::AID-BEM1>3.0.CO;2-5 · DOI
  4. Royal Society of Canada, 1999, A Review of the Potential Health Effects of Radiofrequency Fields from Wireless Telecommunications Devices
  5. Cardis, 1999, International Case-Control Study of Adult Brain, head and neck tumours: results of the feasibility study, Rad Prot Dos, 83, 179, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a032657 · DOI
  6. Dreyer, 1999, Cause-specific mortality in cellular telephone users, JAMA, 282, 1814, 10.1001/jama.282.19.1814-a · DOI
  7. Johansen, 2001, Cellular telephones and cancer–a nationwide cohort study in Denmark, J Natl Cancer Inst, 93, 203, 10.1093/jnci/93.3.203 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Schuz, 2006, Cellular telephone use and cancer risk: update of a nationwide Danish cohort, J Natl Cancer Inst, 98, 1707, 10.1093/jnci/djj464 · DOI
  9. Auvinen, 2002, Brain tumors and salivary gland cancers among cellular telephone users, Epidemiology, 13, 356, 10.1097/00001648-200205000-00018 · DOI
  10. Christensen, 2005, Cellular telephones and risk for brain tumors: a population-based, incident case-control study, Neurology, 64, 1189, 10.1212/01.WNL.0000156351.72313.D3 · DOI
  11. Hardell, 1999, Use of cellular telephones and the risk for brain tumours: a case-control study, Int J Oncol, 15, 113
  12. Hardell, 2006, Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on the use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk of benign brain tumours diagnosed during 1997–2003, Int J Oncol, 28, 509
  13. Hardell, 2006, Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk for malignant brain tumours diagnosed in 1997–2003, Int Arch Occup Environ Health, 79, 630, 10.1007/s00420-006-0088-5 · DOI
  14. Hardell, 2006, Tumour risk associated with use of cellular telephones or cordless desktop telephones, World J Surg Oncol, 4, 74, 10.1186/1477-7819-4-74 · DOI
  15. Hepworth, 2006, Mobile phone use and risk of glioma in adults: case-control study, Br Med J, 332, 883, 10.1136/bmj.38720.687975.55 · DOI
  16. Hours, 2007, [Cell Phones and Risk of brain and acoustic nerve tumours: the French INTERPHONE case-control study], Rev Epidemiol Santé Publique, 55, 321, 10.1016/j.respe.2007.06.002 · DOI
  17. Inskip, 2001, Cellular-telephone use and brain tumors, N Engl J Med, 344, 79, 10.1056/NEJM200101113440201 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Klaeboe, 2007, Use of mobile phones in Norway and risk of intracranial tumours, Eur J Cancer Prev, 16, 158, 10.1097/01.cej.0000203616.77183.4c · DOI
  19. Lahkola, 2007, Mobile phone use and risk of glioma in 5 North European countries, Int J Cancer, 120, 1769, 10.1002/ijc.22503 · DOI
  20. Lahkola, 2008, Meningioma and mobile phone use – a collaborative case-control study in five North European countries, Int J Epidemiol, 37, 1304, 10.1093/ije/dyn155 · DOI
  21. Lonn, 2005, Long-term mobile phone use and brain tumor risk, Am J Epidemiol, 161, 526, 10.1093/aje/kwi091 · DOI
  22. Muscat, 2000, Handheld cellular telephone use and risk of brain cancer, JAMA, 284, 3001, 10.1001/jama.284.23.3001 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Schuz, 2006, Cellular phones, cordless phones, and the risks of glioma and meningioma (Interphone study group, Germany), Am J Epidemiol, 163, 512, 10.1093/aje/kwj068 · DOI
  24. Takebayashi, 2008, Mobile phone use, exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic field, and brain tumour: a case-control study, Br J Cancer, 98, 652, 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604214 · DOI
  25. Cardis, 2007, The INTERPHONE Study: design, epidemiological methods, and description of the study population, Eur J Epidemiol, 22, 647, 10.1007/s10654-007-9152-z · DOI · Paper page
  26. Breslow, 1980, Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume I - The analysis of case-control studies, IARC Sci Publ, 32, 335
  27. Greenland, 1989, The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation, Am J Epidemiol, 130, 1066, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115409 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Cardis, 2008, Distribution of RF energy emitted by mobile phones in anatomical structures of the brain, Phys Med Biol, 53, 2771, 10.1088/0031-9155/53/11/001 · DOI
  29. Vrijheid, 2009, Quantifying the impact of selection bias caused by nonparticipation in a case-control study of mobile phone use, Ann Epidemiol, 19, 33, 10.1016/j.annepidem.2008.10.006 · DOI
  30. Chakrabarti, 2005, A population-based description of glioblastoma multiforme in Los Angeles County, 1974–1999, Cancer, 104, 2798, 10.1002/cncr.21539 · DOI
  31. Schmidt, 2008, Social inequality and incidence of and survival from tumours of the central nervous system in a population-based study in Denmark, 1994–2003, Eur J Cancer, 44, 2050, 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.06.015 · DOI
  32. Saracci, 2008, Commentary: observational studies may conceal a weakly elevated risk under the appearance of consistently reduced risks, Int J Epidemiol, 37, 1313, 10.1093/ije/dyn200 · DOI
  33. Vrijheid, 2006, The effects of recall errors and of selection bias in epidemiologic studies of mobile phone use and cancer risk, J Exp Sci Environ Epidemiol, 16, 371, 10.1038/sj.jes.7500509 · DOI
  34. Kolb, 2008, Fundamentals of Neuropsychology
  35. Vrijheid, 2006, Validation of short-term recall of mobile phone use for the Interphone Study, Occup Environ Med, 63, 237, 10.1136/oem.2004.019281 · DOI
  36. Vrijheid, 2009, Recall bias in the assessment of exposure to mobile phones, J Exp Sci Environ Epidemiol, 19, 369, 10.1038/jes.2008.27 · DOI
  37. Birkett, 1992, Effect of nondifferential misclassification on estimates of odds ratios with multiple levels of exposure, Am J Epidemiol, 136, 356, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116500 · DOI
  38. Brenner, 1994, Varied forms of bias due to nondifferential error in measuring exposure, Epidemiology, 5, 510
  39. Dosemeci, 1990, Does nondifferential misclassification of exposure always bias a true effect toward the null value?, Am J Epidemiol, 132, 746, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115716 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Ahlbom, 2009, Epidemiologic evidence on mobile phones and tumor risk: a review, Epidemiology, 20, 639, 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181b0927d · DOI
  41. SCENIHR, Health Effects of EMF. Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR), 2009

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
The INTERPHONE Study Group
Venue
International Journal of Epidemiology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2010-05-05
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
675-694
ISSN
  • 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3685
DOI
10.1093/ije/dyq079
OpenAlex
W2121933361
Cited by
657
References
0
FWCI
36.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.