Geographic patterns in wildland fire exposures and county-level lung cancer mortality in the United States

Abstract

Background: Emissions from wildfire plumes are composed of modified biomass combustion by-products, including carcinogens. However, studies of the association between wildland fires (WF; includes wildfires, prescribed burns, and resource management fires) exposure and lung cancer are scant. We evaluated geographic patterns in these exposures and their association with lung cancer mortality (LCM) rates across the conterminous United States (US).

Methods: We extracted data from the Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity program (1997-2003) and derived county-level exposure metrics: WF density by area, WF density by population, the ratio between total burned land area and county area, and the ratio between total burned land area by population. We obtained sex-specific, county-level LCM rates for 2016-2020 from the National Center for Health Statistics. Counties with fewer than 10 cases were suppressed. To account for cigarette smoking, we first modeled residual values from a Poisson regression between cigarette smoking prevalence and sex-specific, age-adjusted LCM rates. We then used Lee's L statistic for bivariate spatial association to identify counties with statistically significant (p < 0.05) associations between WF exposures and these residuals. In a sensitivity analysis, we applied a false discovery rate correction to adjust for multiple comparisons.

Results: We observed geographic variation in bivariate associations between large WFs and subsequent LCM rates across US counties while accounting for ever cigarette smoking prevalence. There were positive (high WF exposures and high LCM rate) clusters for males and females in counties within the mid-Appalachian region and Florida, and modest differences across WF metrics in the cluster patterns were observed across the Western US and Central regions. The most positive clusters were seen between WF density by area and LCM rates among women (n = 82 counties) and a similar geographic pattern among men (n = 75 counties). Similar patterns were observed for males and females in the western US, with clusters of high WF exposures and low LCM rates. After adjusting for multiple comparisons, a positive cluster pattern among both sexes persisted in Kentucky and Florida with area-based exposure metrics.

Discussion: Our analysis identified counties outside the western US with wildfires associated with lung cancer mortality. Studies with individual-level exposure-response assessments are needed to evaluate this relationship further.

Keywords: Clustering; Lung cancer mortality; Smoking prevalence; Spatial analysis; Wildland fires.

Fig. 1

Distribution of wildland fire occurrences across conterminous United States counties, 1997–2003

Fig. 2

Distribution of area burned across conterminous US counties, 1997–2003

Fig. 3

Bivariate associations between county-level wildland fire density (# events per 1,000 km squared, 1997–2003) and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among females, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 4

Bivariate associations between county-level wildland fire density (# events per 1,000 km squared, 1997–2003) and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among males, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 5

Bivariate associations between population-normalized county-level wildland fire density (# events per 100,000 persons, 1997–2003) and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among females, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 6

Bivariate associations between population-normalized county-level wildland fire density (# events per 100,000 persons, 1997–2003) and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among males, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 7

Bivariate associations between county-level burned area in a county-to-area county ratio (1997–2003) and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among females, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 8

Bivariate associations between county-level burned area in a county-to-area county ratio (1997–2003) and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among males, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 9

Bivariate associations between county-level burned area per 100,000 persons (1997–2003) based on county population and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among females, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05

Fig. 10

Bivariate between county-level burned area per 100,000 persons (1997–2003) based on county population and age-adjusted LCM rates (2016–2020) among males, accounting for the county-level prevalence of ever smoking (1997–2003). Not significant denoted as p > 0.05