Our Research
Breast Cancer and Environmental Justice
Cape Cod Breast Cancer and Environment
GIS Exposure Assessment
Groundwater and Drinking Water
Household Exposures
Massachusetts Health and Environment Information System
Newton Breast Cancer
Science Review: Environment and Breast Cancer

The Newton Breast Cancer Study

The Newton Breast Cancer Study was initiated as follow-up to research by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) that identified areas of high and low incidence in Newton, ranging from 22% below to 55% above the statewide rate for the period 1982-1992. The study, conducted by Silent Spring Institute, investigated differences between the high- and low-incidence areas in factors known or hypothesized to affect breast cancer risk. The study involved approximately 1,350 Newton women who responded to a questionnaire about their health history, individual characteristics and habits, and home environments.

Key Findings

Traditional individual characteristics known to affect breast cancer risk, including reproductive

history and family history of breast cancer, account for only 5% of the difference in breast cancer rates between high- and low-incidence areas.

Possible environmental risk factors, which are associated with higher income and education, contribute 14% to the difference between high- and low-incidence areas. Possible environmental factors include use of lawn services, dry cleaning, and pesticide use.

At the outset of the study, census data showed that residents of Newton's higher incidence area had higher incomes than those in the low-incidence neighborhood. Survey results similarly showed higher income, education, and other indicators of higher socioeconomic status (SES) in high-incidence areas.

Map of Incidence Rates in Newton

Map of study area

Because income and education are not themselves causes of breast cancer, further analysis investigated whether the well-known association between SES and breast cancer risk may be the result of environmental exposures. Results showed that significantly greater use of certain products among higher SES women contributed to differences between high- and low-incidence areas.

65% of women in high-incidence areas, reported using professional lawn service compared with 36% in low-incidence areas.
17% of women in high-incidence areas reported using termite treatments in their homes, compared with 9% in the low-incidence areas.
30% of women in high-incidence areas reported high routine use of pesticides, compared with 23% in low-incidence areas.
36% of women in high incidence areas reported use of flea and tick products, compared with 42% in low-incidence areas, a pattern in contrast to results on use of other chemical products.

These findings are intriguing because many pesticides contain endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) that mimic our natural hormones. Exposure to EDCs is an emerging area of study for breast cancer risk. Since a woman's lifetime exposure to natural estrogen is linked to higher breast cancer risk, exposure to compounds that mimic estrogen and other hormones may also increase risk.

Higher rates of mammography and breast self-exam in high-incidence areas are likely to contribute to higher reported breast cancer rates: 27% of women in high-incidence areas said they had had 10 or more mammograms, compared with 17% in low-incidence areas. Because screening leads to earlier diagnoses, it may contribute to temporarily higher reported incidence.

The higher proportion of Jewish women in high-incidence areas did not account for the difference in incidence between the study areas.

The study team included researchers from JSI Research and Training Institute, Inc. and Applied Geographics, Inc.

privacy notice | copyright statement
Updated Friday, May 11, 2007 6:34 PM