Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2025 May 7;25(1):1690.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-22961-4.

Incidence of solid cancers among residents near nuclear facilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ga Bin Lee  1 , Yerin Hwang  2 , Soojin Park  1 , Eun-Shil Cha  1 , Dalnim Lee  1 , Kyungsik Kim  3   4 , Sue K Park  3   4   5 , Minsu Cho  1 , Songwon Seo  6
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Incidence of solid cancers among residents near nuclear facilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ga Bin Lee et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Concerns about the potential health effects of radiation exposure in communities living near nuclear facilities persist, prompting ongoing studies across various countries. However, research on solid cancers in these communities remains limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively investigate the incidence of various solid cancers among residents near nuclear facilities, providing up-to-date scientific evidence on potential health effects in the context of energy security and net-zero emission targets.

Methods: A comprehensive search of the databases PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, and Web of Science was conducted. Data were extracted from 13 studies on breast, bladder, thyroid, CNS, and respiratory cancers, with the meta-analysis focusing on cancer types supported by at least five quantitative estimates to account for study heterogeneity. Study quality was assessed using the Office of Health Assessment and Translation tool. Pooled standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated using random-effects models, and publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test.

Results: The meta-analyses included the following number of cases for each selected cancer type: breast, n = 20,701; bladder, n = 5,398; thyroid, n = 9,907; CNS, n = 3,634; and respiratory system, n = 18,033. Pooled SIRs for all cancer subtypes were statistically insignificant and ranged from 0.99 to 1.04, with substantial heterogeneity among studies (I2 range: 64%-96%). Little evidence of publication bias was revealed upon visual inspection of the funnel plots and performing Egger's test.

Conclusions: Current scientific evidence regarding the incidence of solid cancers in populations living near nuclear facilities is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions. Nonetheless, the wide range of heterogeneity among studies highlights the need for further research with refined study designs, particularly with regard to radiation exposure and individual-level confounding factors, to provide more robust evidence on the public health implications for residents near nuclear facilities.

Keywords: Environmental Exposure; Epidemiologic Studies; Meta-Analysis; Radiation Exposure; Radiation-Induced Neoplasms; Systematic Review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: This study was literature-based. Therefore, approval by an institutional review board and informed consent were not required. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of the systematic review search process for assessing solid cancer incidence among individuals residing near nuclear facilities
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plots illustrating pooled standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for solid cancer subtypes among individuals residing near nuclear facilities
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Black D. Investigation of the possible increased incidence of cancer in West Cumbria. Report of the Independent Advisory Group. 1984. Available from: https://pdf.library.soton.ac.uk/BOPCRIS/22690/pdf/22690_1.pdf.
    1. Spix C, Schmiedel S, Kaatsch P, Schulze-Rath R, Blettner M. Case–control study on childhood cancer in the vicinity of nuclear power plants in Germany 1980–2003. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44(2):275–84. - PubMed
    1. Sermage-Faure C, Laurier D, Goujon-Bellec S, Chartier M, Guyot-Goubin A, Rudant J, Hémon D, Clavel J. Childhood leukemia around French nuclear power plants—the Geocap study, 2002–2007. Int J Cancer. 2012;131(5):E769–80. - PubMed
    1. Committee on the Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations near Nuclear Facilities—Phase I, Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council. Analysis of cancer risks in populations near nuclear facilities: Phase 1. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2012. 10.17226/13388. - PubMed
    1. Liu L, Guo H, Dai L, Liu M, Xiao Y, Cong T, Gu H. The role of nuclear energy in the carbon neutrality goal. Prog Nucl Energy. 2023;162:104772.

LinkOut - more resources