TY - JOUR
T1 - Long-Term Exposure to Low-Level
P
M
2.5
and Mortality
T2 - Investigation of Heterogeneity by Harmonizing Analyses in Large Cohort Studies in Canada, United States, and Europe.
AU - Chen, Jie
AU - Braun, Danielle
AU - Christidis, Tanya
AU - Cork, Michael
AU - Rodopoulou, Sophia
AU - Samoli, Evangelia
AU - Stafoggia, Massimo
AU - Wolf, Kathrin
AU - Wu, Xiao
AU - Yuchi, Weiran
AU - Andersen, Zorana J
AU - Atkinson, Richard
AU - Bauwelinck, Mariska
AU - de Hoogh, Kees
AU - Janssen, Nicole A H
AU - Katsouyanni, Klea
AU - Klompmaker, Jochem O
AU - Kristoffersen, Doris Tove
AU - Lim, Youn-Hee
AU - Oftedal, Bente
AU - Strak, Maciej
AU - Vienneau, Danielle
AU - Zhang, Jiawei
AU - Burnett, Richard T
AU - Hoek, Gerard
AU - Dominici, Francesca
AU - Brauer, Michael
AU - Brunekreef, Bert
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - BACKGROUND: Studies across the globe generally reported increased mortality risks associated with particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter
≤
2.5
μ
m
(
PM
2.5
) exposure with large heterogeneity in the magnitude of reported associations and the shape of concentration-response functions (CRFs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of key study design factors (including confounders, applied exposure model, population age, and outcome definition) on
PM
2.5
effect estimates by harmonizing analyses on three previously published large studies in Canada [Mortality-Air Pollution Associations in Low Exposure Environments (MAPLE), 1991-2016], the United States (Medicare, 2000-2016), and Europe [Effects of Low-Level Air Pollution: A Study in Europe (ELAPSE), 2000-2016] as much as possible.
METHODS: We harmonized the study populations to individuals
65
+
years of age, applied the same satellite-derived
PM
2.5
exposure estimates, and selected the same sets of potential confounders and the same outcome. We evaluated whether differences in previously published effect estimates across cohorts were reduced after harmonization among these factors. Additional analyses were conducted to assess the influence of key design features on estimated risks, including adjusted covariates and exposure assessment method. A combined CRF was assessed with meta-analysis based on the extended shape-constrained health impact function (eSCHIF).
RESULTS: More than 81 million participants were included, contributing 692 million person-years of follow-up. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all-cause mortality associated with a
5
-
μ
g
/
m
3
increase in
PM
2.5
were 1.039 (1.032, 1.046) in MAPLE, 1.025 (1.021, 1.029) in Medicare, and 1.041 (1.014, 1.069) in ELAPSE. Applying a harmonized analytical approach marginally reduced difference in the observed associations across the three studies. Magnitude of the association was affected by the adjusted covariates, exposure assessment methodology, age of the population, and marginally by outcome definition. Shape of the CRFs differed across cohorts but generally showed associations down to the lowest observed
PM
2.5
levels. A common CRF suggested a monotonically increased risk down to the lowest exposure level. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP12141.
AB - BACKGROUND: Studies across the globe generally reported increased mortality risks associated with particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter
≤
2.5
μ
m
(
PM
2.5
) exposure with large heterogeneity in the magnitude of reported associations and the shape of concentration-response functions (CRFs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of key study design factors (including confounders, applied exposure model, population age, and outcome definition) on
PM
2.5
effect estimates by harmonizing analyses on three previously published large studies in Canada [Mortality-Air Pollution Associations in Low Exposure Environments (MAPLE), 1991-2016], the United States (Medicare, 2000-2016), and Europe [Effects of Low-Level Air Pollution: A Study in Europe (ELAPSE), 2000-2016] as much as possible.
METHODS: We harmonized the study populations to individuals
65
+
years of age, applied the same satellite-derived
PM
2.5
exposure estimates, and selected the same sets of potential confounders and the same outcome. We evaluated whether differences in previously published effect estimates across cohorts were reduced after harmonization among these factors. Additional analyses were conducted to assess the influence of key design features on estimated risks, including adjusted covariates and exposure assessment method. A combined CRF was assessed with meta-analysis based on the extended shape-constrained health impact function (eSCHIF).
RESULTS: More than 81 million participants were included, contributing 692 million person-years of follow-up. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all-cause mortality associated with a
5
-
μ
g
/
m
3
increase in
PM
2.5
were 1.039 (1.032, 1.046) in MAPLE, 1.025 (1.021, 1.029) in Medicare, and 1.041 (1.014, 1.069) in ELAPSE. Applying a harmonized analytical approach marginally reduced difference in the observed associations across the three studies. Magnitude of the association was affected by the adjusted covariates, exposure assessment methodology, age of the population, and marginally by outcome definition. Shape of the CRFs differed across cohorts but generally showed associations down to the lowest observed
PM
2.5
levels. A common CRF suggested a monotonically increased risk down to the lowest exposure level. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP12141.
KW - Humans
KW - Aged
KW - Air Pollutants/analysis
KW - Environmental Exposure/analysis
KW - National Health Programs
KW - Air Pollution/analysis
KW - Particulate Matter/analysis
KW - Europe/epidemiology
KW - Cohort Studies
KW - Canada/epidemiology
U2 - 10.1289/EHP12141
DO - 10.1289/EHP12141
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 38039140
VL - 131
JO - Environmental Health Perspectives
JF - Environmental Health Perspectives
SN - 0091-6765
IS - 12
M1 - 127003
ER -