Jongeun Rhee

Fine Particulate Matter, Noise Pollution, and Greenspace and Prostate Cancer Risk in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Cohort

Abstract Background: Greenspace is hypothesized as being protective against cancer, whereas noise pollution and fine particulate matter (<2.5 μm in diameter, PM2.5) are both potential risk factors. Findings from recent studies of greenspace and PM2.5 with prostate cancer are not conclusive and the association between noise exposure and cancer has not been evaluated in a U.S. study. Methods: We assessed PM2.5, noise, and greenspace exposure using spatiotemporal models and satellite-based estimates at enrollment addresses for N = 43,184 male participants of the prospective Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer (PLCO) Screening Trial cohort (enrolled 1994–2001). We used Cox regression models adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, study center, family history of prostate cancer, and Area Deprivation Index to estimate associations between ambient PM2.5 (μg/m3), greenspace (index range from –1 to 1), and noise pollution (loudest 10% of total existing sound, decibels) and incident prostate cancer risk through December 2017. Results: A total of 6,327 cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed among male participants during follow-up. PM2.5 and noise exposures were moderately positively correlated (Spearman ρ = 0.46), and PM2.5 and greenspace were not correlated (ρ = 0.10); greenspace and noise were inversely correlated (ρ = −0.32). In single-pollutant and multipollutant models mutually adjusted for coexposures, we found no associations with prostate cancer risk. Conclusions: We did not find evidence that PM2.5, greenspace, and noise pollution were associated with prostate cancer risk in this large, geographically spread cohort. Impact: This study contributes to a small body of existing literature investigating these biologically plausible associations.

Serum perfluorooctane sulfonate and perfluorooctanoate and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer according to hormone receptor status: An analysis in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial

Abstract Per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are highly persistent endocrine‐disrupting chemicals that may contribute to breast cancer development; however, epidemiologic evidence is limited. We investigated associations between prediagnostic serum levels of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) and postmenopausal breast cancer risk, overall and by hormone receptor status, in a nested case‐control study of 621 cases and 621 matched controls in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. PFOS and PFOA levels were determined based on serum metabolomic profiling performed using ultraperformance liquid chromatography‐tandem mass spectrometry. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between each PFAS and breast cancer risk, overall, by estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) status, and by joint ER/PR status. We found little evidence of association between PFOS or PFOA and breast cancer risk overall. However, in subtype‐specific analyses, we observed statistically significant increased risks of ER+, PR+, and ER+/PR+ tumors for the third vs lowest quartile of serum PFOS (ORs [95% CIs] = 1.59 [1.01‐2.50], 2.34 [1.29‐4.23], and 2.19 [1.21‐3.98], respectively) and elevated but nonstatistically significant ORs for the fourth quartile. Conversely, for PFOA, modest positive associations with ER−, PR−, ER+/PR−, and ER−/PR− tumors were generally seen in the upper quartiles. Our findings contribute evidence supporting positive associations between serum PFOS and hormone receptor‐positive tumors, and possibly between PFOA and receptor‐negative tumors. Future prospective studies incorporating tumor hormone receptor status are needed to better understand the role of PFAS in breast cancer etiology.