5021.0: Wednesday, October 24, 2001: 8:30 AM-10:00 AM | ||||
Oral Session | ||||
| ||||
| When the Massachusetts health department first reported cancer incidence by town in 1993, a majority of Cape Cod towns showed higher incidence than the statewide rate. An alliance of citizens, scientists, and public officials came together to ask why. Detailed surveillance and existing case-control data showed elevated incidence that was not explained by established risk factors. Given that natural and pharmaceutical estrogens increase breast cancer risk, the study team focused on synthetic estrogens, other endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs), and chemicals that cause mammary tumors in animals. These compounds are common in pesticides, detergents, plastics, cosmetics, and other consumer products and in air and water pollutants; and Cape Cod may have a history of distinctive exposures from pesticides and septic system contamination of groundwater. To estimate historical exposures relevant to breast cancer etiology, new geographic information system (GIS) tools were developed. These tools estimate exposures at individual addresses using multiple environmental data sources, including pesticide application records, land use, meteorological data, and presence of forest buffers that affect pesticide drift. Patterns of exposure in a case-control study of 2100 women will be described. In addition, household air and dust samples were collected from homes of 120 study participants and analyzed for 86 target compounds, and early results will be reported. Comparisons with the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project will be described; and the role of regional studies to complement national initiatives represented by HealthTrack and US CDCP Exposure Report will be discussed. | ||||
| See individual abstracts for presenting author's disclosure statement. | ||||
| Learning Objectives: 1. Identify how research priorities emerge from tracking patterns in breast cancer incidence. 2. Learn models for how can the public, health officials, and scientists can work in partnership to design research of both public and scientific importance 3. Evaluate the strengths and limitations of exposure assessment methods – interview, GIS, environmental sampling, biological sampling -- and how can they be designed to be complementary. 4. Learn typical household concentrations of target compounds for breast cancer research. 5. Consider how in-depth study in one geographic region complement national initiatives, such as HealthTrack and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Exposure Report | ||||
| Julia Green Brody, PhD | ||||
| Emerging GIS capabilities for disease surveillance, environmental hazard identification, ecologic analyses, and individual-level exposure assessment for health studies Joan Gardner, Theresa Kennedy, MA, Julia Green Brody, PhD | ||||
| GIS in exposure assessment for pesticides in the Cape Cod Breast Cancer and Environment Study and the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project Erin S. O'Leary, PhD, Chris Swartz, PhD, Ruthann A. Rudel, MA, Julia Green Brody, PhD | ||||
| Characterizing exposure to a wide range of chemicals of interest for breast cancer research: Indoor air and dust and urinary measures for pesticides, endocrine disruptors, and animal mammary carcinogens Ruthann A. Rudel, MA, Dana Barr, PhD, Julia Green Brody, PhD | ||||
| Public involvement in breast cancer research: an analysis and model for future research Sabrina McCormick, MA, Ruth Polk, MS, Phil Brown, PhD, Julia Green Brody, PhD | ||||
| PBB exposure and benign breast disease in a cohort of U.S women Reinhard Kaiser, Michele Marcus, Heidi Michels Blanck, Mary Naughton, Rebecca H. Zhang, Alden K. Henderson, Paige E. Tolbert, Carol Rubin, Vicki S. Hertzberg, PhD | ||||
| Sponsor: | Environment | |||
| Cosponsors: | Public Health Nursing; Socialist Caucus; Women's Caucus | |||
| CE Credits: | CME, Environmental Health, Health Education (CHES), Nursing, Pharmacy, Social Work | |||