You are leaving Medscape Education
Cancel Continue
Log in to save activities Your saved activities will show here so that you can easily access them whenever you're ready. Log in here CME & Education Log in to keep track of your credits.
 

 

CME / CE

Cell Phone Use and Brain Cancer Link: Doubts Still Remain

  • Authors: News Author: Roxanne Nelson, RN, BSN
    CME Author: Laurie Barclay, MD
  • CME / CE Released: 6/2/2016
  • THIS ACTIVITY HAS EXPIRED FOR CREDIT
  • Valid for credit through: 6/2/2017, 11:59 PM EST
Start Activity


Target Audience and Goal Statement

This article is intended for primary care clinicians, hematologists, oncologists, neurologists, nurses, public health officials, and other members of the healthcare team involved in the care of persons seeking advice regarding cell phone use and brain cancer risk.

The goal of this activity is to provide medical news to primary care clinicians and other healthcare professionals in order to enhance patient care.

Upon completion of this activity, participants will be able to:

  1. Interpret findings of an analysis of the association of brain cancer incidence with mobile phone use
  2. Determine the clinical implications of these findings regarding the association of brain cancer incidence with mobile phone use


Disclosures

As an organization accredited by the ACCME, Medscape, LLC, requires everyone who is in a position to control the content of an education activity to disclose all relevant financial relationships with any commercial interest. The ACCME defines "relevant financial relationships" as financial relationships in any amount, occurring within the past 12 months, including financial relationships of a spouse or life partner, that could create a conflict of interest.

Medscape, LLC, encourages Authors to identify investigational products or off-label uses of products regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration, at first mention and where appropriate in the content.


Author(s)

  • Roxanne Nelson, RN, BSN

    Journalist, Medscape Oncology

    Disclosures

    Disclosure: Roxanne Nelson, RN, BSN, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Editor(s)

  • Robert Morris, PharmD

    Associate CME Clinical Director, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Disclosure: Robert Morris, PharmD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

CME Author(s)

  • Laurie Barclay, MD

    Freelance writer and reviewer, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Disclosure: Laurie Barclay, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
    Owns stock, stock options, or bonds from: Pfizer

CME Reviewer/Nurse Planner

  • Amy Bernard, MS, BSN, RN-BC

    Lead Nurse Planner, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Disclosure: Amy Bernard, MS, BSN, RN-BC, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.


Accreditation Statements

    For Physicians

  • Medscape, LLC is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

    Medscape, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™ . Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

    This Enduring Material activity, Medscape Education Clinical Briefs, has been reviewed and is acceptable for up to 65.00 Prescribed credit(s) by the American Academy of Family Physicians. Term of approval begins 09/01/2015. Term of approval is for one year from this date. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

    Medscape, LLC staff have disclosed that they have no relevant financial relationships.

    AAFP Accreditation Questions

    Contact This Provider

    For Nurses

  • Medscape, LLC is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation.

    Awarded 0.25 contact hour(s) of continuing nursing education for RNs and APNs; none of these credits is in the area of pharmacology.

    Contact This Provider

For questions regarding the content of this activity, contact the accredited provider for this CME/CE activity noted above. For technical assistance, contact [email protected]


Instructions for Participation and Credit

There are no fees for participating in or receiving credit for this online educational activity. For information on applicability and acceptance of continuing education credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.

This activity is designed to be completed within the time designated on the title page; physicians should claim only those credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the activity online during the valid credit period that is noted on the title page. To receive AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™, you must receive a minimum score of 70% on the post-test.

Follow these steps to earn CME/CE credit*:

  1. Read the target audience, learning objectives, and author disclosures.
  2. Study the educational content online or printed out.
  3. Online, choose the best answer to each test question. To receive a certificate, you must receive a passing score as designated at the top of the test. We encourage you to complete the Activity Evaluation to provide feedback for future programming.

You may now view or print the certificate from your CME/CE Tracker. You may print the certificate but you cannot alter it. Credits will be tallied in your CME/CE Tracker and archived for 6 years; at any point within this time period you can print out the tally as well as the certificates from the CME/CE Tracker.

*The credit that you receive is based on your user profile.

CME / CE

Cell Phone Use and Brain Cancer Link: Doubts Still Remain

Authors: News Author: Roxanne Nelson, RN, BSN CME Author: Laurie Barclay, MDFaculty and Disclosures
THIS ACTIVITY HAS EXPIRED FOR CREDIT

CME / CE Released: 6/2/2016

Valid for credit through: 6/2/2017, 11:59 PM EST

processing....

Clinical Context

Since 1987, when mobile phones were introduced in Australia, use of these devices has risen dramatically, with whole population usage reaching 94% by 2014. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer Working Group classified radiofrequency electromagnetic waves, including those used in mobile phone communication, as "possibly carcinogenic to humans." However, a 2015 review by the European Union's Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks found no evidence of health effects of mobile phones to humans at current electromagnetic field (EMF) dosage levels.

The goal of this study by Chapman and colleagues was to examine the widely held suggestion that brain cancer incidence is associated with mobile phone use.

Study Synopsis and Perspective

A large study has found no link between cell phone use and brain tumors, although this is undoubtedly not the last word on the controversial subject.

In fact, according to one expert, the analysis lumped together all brain cancers and did not separate out high-grade gliomas (especially in the temporal or frontal lobe), which are the most relevant type.

In their study, the researchers examined age-specific and sex-specific incidence rates in 19,858 men and 14,222 women diagnosed with brain cancer in Australia from 1982 to 2012.

The findings show that the incidence of brain cancer did not increase during the study period in any group except those 70 to 84 years old.

However, in this group, the incidence of brain cancer began to increase in 1982, before the introduction of cell phones.

For the past 2 decades, the use of cell phones has increased dramatically: from approximately 9% in 1993 to roughly 90% currently. However, age-adjusted incidence rates for brain cancer in those 20 to 84 years old have risen only slightly in men during the past 30 years (P <.05) and have remained stable in women (P >.05).

Overall, no increase in the incidence of brain cancer can be considered compatible with the steep increase in cell phone use.

The study was published online May 5 in Cancer Epidemiology.[1]

The findings from this study confirm those from studies published in the New Zealand, the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, and the United States, all of which were unable to prove the hypothesis that "mobile phones cause brain cancer," said lead researcher Simon Chapman, AO, PhD, emeritus professor in public health at the University of Sydney in Sydney, Australia.

"The radiation from cell phones is nonionizing, so it is highly unlikely to cause cancer," he told Medscape Medical News.

The incidence of brain cancer is also higher in men than in women, and sex differences have been observed in other cancer types. However, "there is no evidence that men use phones more often or longer than women," Dr Chapman pointed out.

The slight increase observed in men is explained by the higher incidence in the oldest age group. "There is no rise across time in any younger age groups, and there is a much higher incidence in the oldest age groups -- age being the biggest predictor of most cancers," he explained.

"The rise [of] brain cancers in the oldest age group preceded the introduction of phones so [this] can't be explained by mobile phone use," Dr Chapman added.

Controversy Put to Rest?

Previous studies on the link between cell phones and cancer have been a mixed bag, ignited controversy, and come to various conclusions.

Approximately 30 epidemiologic studies have attempted to evaluate the association between cell-phone use and the risks for brain and salivary gland tumors, as reported by Medscape Medical News.[2] There have also been a number of experimental studies involving cell cultures and animal models.

Although some studies have shown an increase in the risk for brain cancers,[3] others have found no association.[4]

However, for at least one expert, the controversy has been put to rest.

"For most of us, the issue of brain cancer and cell phones is resolved," said John D. Boice Jr, ScD, president of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. "There is no risk. There is no biological mechanism and no animal study or cellular study that finds reproducible evidence of an effect."

The Australian study is interesting, but many descriptive studies also show no change in brain tumor incidence across time, Dr Boice told Medscape Medical News. He is also a professor of medicine at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tennessee.

"The best epidemiologic studies are two prospective studies that are convincingly negative," he said. "The weak evidence from case-control studies are plagued with low response, differential response between cases and controls, and response bias."

Not Conclusive

However, another expert who has extensively researched the link between cell phones and brain cancer does not feel that these results are conclusive.

"We have consistently found an increased risk for high-grade glioma,[3] including the most malignant type, glioblastoma multiforme grade IV, and use of wireless phones," said Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD, from the Department of Oncology at University Hospital in Örebro, Sweden.

"Moreover, the risk is highest for tumors in the frontal and temporal lobes -- areas with highest exposure to radiofrequency radiation during use of the handheld phone," he told Medscape Medical News.

"The study by Dr Chapman and colleagues does not give incidence data for high-grade glioma located in the temporal or frontal lobe, so I am afraid that their study is not very informative," Dr Hardell pointed out. "Lumping together all types of brain tumors, regardless of location in the brain, hampers any conclusions on incidence trends."

He also noted that the real increase in the use of cell phones occurred recently, with the introduction of smartphones.

Increase Only in Oldest Adults

In their study, Dr Chapman and his colleagues modeled expected rates by age group (20-39 years, 40-59 years, 60-69 years, and 70-84 years) using data from published studies, which reported relative risks (RRs) of 1.5 in ever-users of cell phones and of 2.5 in people deemed to be "heavy users" (19% of all users).

A 10-year lag period was assumed between the start of cell phone use and evidence of an increase in the number of brain cancer cases.

Overall, the incidence of brain cancer was higher in men than in women (8.7 vs 5.8 per 100,000). However, the researchers calculated that the expected incidence rates in 2012 should have been 11.7 per 100,000 (P <.01) in men and 7.7 per 100,000 (<.01) in women.

In 2012, only 1434 cases of brain cancer were observed, whereas 1867 cases were expected.

In all age groups, expected incidence rates were higher than observed rates.

The most likely explanation for the increase in adults older than 70 years is improved diagnosis, Dr Chapman and his colleagues point out. In Australia, computed tomography (CT) scans and related imaging technologies were introduced in the early 1980s.

Dr Boice agrees. "CT scans and brain imaging did improve detection," he said.

"The increase among the elderly in Australia, though, is likely also related to stereotactic brain biopsy, where tissue can be obtained relatively easily and diagnoses greatly improved," Dr Boice explained. "In the past, cutting the brain of elderly patients was not likely, so a specific diagnosis of brain tumor not made."

The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Cancer Epidemiol. Published online May 5, 2016.

Study Highlights

  • The investigators used national cancer registration data to identify 19,858 men and 14,222 women diagnosed with brain cancer in Australia between 1982 and 2012.
  • They determined age-specific and sex-specific incidence rates of brain cancer and examined their association with mobile phone usage data.
  • According to published data for RRs of 1.5 in ever-users of mobile phones and 2.5 in "heavy users" (19% of all users), and assuming a 10-year delay between use and incidence, they modeled expected age-specific rates at ages 20 to 39 years, 40 to 59 years, 60 to 69 years, and 70 to 84 years.
  • Age-adjusted incidence rates of brain cancer per 100,000 at ages 20 to 84 years were higher in men (8.7 per 100,000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1-9.3) than in women (5.8 per 100,000; 95% CI, 5.3-6.3), and increased slightly in men (P <.05) but were stable at 30 years in women (P >.05).
  • Assuming a causal RR of 1.5 for mobile phone use causing brain cancer and a 10-year delay, the expected incidence rate in 2012 would be 11.7 (95% CI, 11-12.4) in men and 7.7 (95% CI, 7.2-8.3) in women (P <.01 for both).
  • There were only 1434 cases of brain cancer in 2012, compared with 1867 cases expected from modeling assuming that mobile phone use had a causal role.
  • Only men and women 70 years and older had significant increases in brain cancer incidence. However, increased incidence in this age group began from 1982, before the introduction of mobile phones.
  • In all age groups, modeled vs observed incidence rates were higher.
  • Assuming a causal RR of 2.5 among "heavy users," there were 2038 expected cases across all age groups.
  • Study limitations include ecologic trends analysis, with no data on individual mobile phone use and outcome.
  • In addition, the analysis considered all brain tumors together, rather than looking at gliomas separately. In addition, the study did not separately analyze frontal or temporal tumor location, which would be in closest proximity to the cell phone.
  • In conclusion, the investigators noted observed stability of brain cancer incidence in Australia between 1982 and 2012 in all age groups except in those older than 70 years. Therefore, in contrast to increasing modeled expected estimates, they determined that the observed increases in brain cancer incidence in those older than 70 years are not likely related to mobile phone use.
  • They suggest that the observed increases in brain cancer incidence in Australia may stem from availability of better diagnostic procedures when CT scans and other imaging technologies were introduced in the early 1980s.
  • Large cohort studies are underway.
  • EMF radiation from cell phones is nonionizing and therefore is not thought to be implicated in carcinogenesis, whereas ionizing radiation can cause DNA damage in brain cells.

Clinical Implications

  • In Australia, the incidence of brain cancer between 1982 and 2013 has not increased in any age group except in individuals 70 to 84 years old. In this age group, the increase began in 1982, before the introduction of mobile phones.
  • The investigators suggest that the increases in brain cancer incidence in the oldest age group may stem from better diagnostic detection across time.
  • Implications for the Healthcare Team: The healthcare team should be aware that this study found no increase in the incidence of brain cancer compatible with the sharp increase in mobile phone use.

CME Test

  • Print