A case–control study of risk of leukaemia in relation to mobile phone use

Background Mobile phone use is now ubiquitous, and scientific reviews have recommended research into its relation to leukaemia risk, but no large studies have been conducted.Methods In a case-control study in South East England to investigate the relation of acute and non-lymphocytic leukaemia risk to mobile phone use, 806 cases with leukaemia incident 2003-2009 at ages 18-59 years (50% of those identified as eligible) and 585 non-blood relatives as controls (provided by 392 cases) were interviewed about mobile phone use and other potentially aetiological variables.Results No association was found between regular mobile phone use and risk of leukaemia (odds ratio (OR)=1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.76, 1.46). Analyses of risk in relation to years since first use, lifetime years of use, cumulative number of calls and cumulative hours of use produced no significantly raised risks, and there was no evidence of any trends. A non-significantly raised risk was found in people who first used a phone 15 or more years ago (OR=1.87, 95% CI=0.96, 3.63). Separate analyses of analogue and digital phone use and leukaemia subtype produced similar results to those overall.Conclusion This study suggests that use of mobile phones does not increase leukaemia risk, although the possibility of an effect after long-term use, while biologically unlikely, remains open

Mobile phones and head tumours. The discrepancies in cause-effect relationships in the epidemiological studies - how do they arise?

The uncertainty about the relationship between the use of mobile phones (MPs: analogue and digital cellulars, and cordless) and the increase of head tumour risk can be solved by a critical analysis of the methodological elements of both the positive and the negative studies. Results by Hardell indicate a cause/effect relationship: exposures for or latencies from 65 10 years to MPs increase by up to 100% the risk of tumour on the same side of the head preferred for phone use (ipsilateral tumours) - which is the only one significantly irradiated - with statistical significance for brain gliomas, meningiomas and acoustic neuromas. On the contrary, studies published under the Interphone project and others produced negative results and are characterised by the substantial underestimation of the risk of tumour. However, also in the Interphone studies a clear and statistically significant increase of ipsilateral head tumours (gliomas, neuromas and parotid gland tumours) is quite common in people having used MPs since or for 65 10 years. And also the metaanalyses by Hardell and other Authors, including only the literature data on ipsilateral tumours in people having used MPs since or for 65 10 years - and so also part of the Interphone data - still show statistically significant increases of head tumours

Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study.

International audienceBACKGROUND: The rapid increase in mobile telephone use has generated concern about possible health risks of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from these devices. METHODS: A case-control study of 1105 patients with newly diagnosed acoustic neuroma (vestibular schwannoma) and 2145 controls was conducted in 13 countries using a common protocol. Past mobile phone use was assessed by personal interview. In the primary analysis, exposure time was censored at one year before the reference date (date of diagnosis for cases and date of diagnosis of the matched case for controls); analyses censoring exposure at five years before the reference date were also done to allow for a possible longer latent period. RESULTS: The odds ratio (OR) of acoustic neuroma with ever having been a regular mobile phone user was 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.69-1.04). The OR for ≥10 years after first regular mobile phone use was 0.76 (0.52-1.11). There was no trend of increasing ORs with increasing cumulative call time or cumulative number of calls, with the lowest OR (0.48 (0.30-0.78)) observed in the 9th decile of cumulative call time. In the 10th decile (≥1640 h) of cumulative call time, the OR was 1.32 (0.88-1.97); there were, however, implausible values of reported use in those with ≥1640 h of accumulated mobile phone use. With censoring at 5 years before the reference date the OR for ≥10 years after first regular mobile phone use was 0.83 (0.58-1.19) and for ≥1640 h of cumulative call time it was 2.79 (1.51-5.16), but again with no trend in the lower nine deciles and with the lowest OR in the 9th decile. In general, ORs were not greater in subjects who reported usual phone use on the same side of the head as their tumour than in those who reported it on the opposite side, but it was greater in those in the 10th decile of cumulative hours of use. CONCLUSIONS: There was no increase in risk of acoustic neuroma with ever regular use of a mobile phone or for users who began regular use 10 years or more before the reference date. Elevated odds ratios observed at the highest level of cumulative call time could be due to chance, reporting bias or a causal effect. As acoustic neuroma is usually a slowly growing tumour, the interval between introduction of mobile phones and occurrence of the tumour might have been too short to observe an effect, if there is one