Share
𝕏 Facebook LinkedIn

Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on cancer in laboratory animal studies, a systematic review

PAPER manual Environment International 2025 Systematic review Effect: harm Evidence: High

Abstract

Category: Toxicology, Environmental Health, Carcinogenesis Tags: RF EMF, cancer, animal studies, carcinogenicity, systematic review, schwannoma, glioma DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2025.109482 URL: sciencedirect.com Overview More than ten years ago, the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a monograph concluding there was limited evidence in experimental animals for the carcinogenicity of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field (RF EMF). This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effects of RF EMF exposure on cancer in experimental animals, specifically assessing studies like chronic cancer bioassays, initiation-(co-)promotion studies, and studies with tumor-prone animals. Methods - Eligibility: Studies in experimental animals fitting specific chronic bioassay and tumor-promotion criteria were included. - Sources: MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Emerging Sources Citation Index, and the EMF Portal were utilized. - Data Handling: A risk-of-bias (RoB) tool and GRADE approach, adapted for environmental health, were used for assessment. Effect sizes were provided as 1% Bayesian Average benchmark dose (BMD) when applicable. Findings - 52 studies were included, with 20 chronic bioassays. - Diverse study designs prevented quantitative meta-analysis, but a narrative approach was employed due to heterogeneity in species, exposure characteristics, and outcomes. - Most studies found no or minimal evidence of RF EMF exposure causing cancer in organs such as gastrointestinal, kidney, mammary gland, urinary, endocrine, musculoskeletal, reproductive, and auditory systems. - High certainty of evidence (CoE) for increased risk of: - Malignant heart schwannomas in male rats - Glial cell-derived brain neoplasms (gliomas) in male rats - Moderate CoE for increased risk of cancers such as lymphoma, adrenal gland neoplasms (pheochromocytoma), liver tumors (hepatoblastomas), and lung neoplasms. - Several findings, i.e., heart schwannomas and gliomas, align with evidence previously considered in humans by IARC. Conclusion This systematic review demonstrates that RF EMF exposure increases the incidence of cancer in laboratory animals, with the strongest evidence for heart schwannomas and gliomas. These findings strengthen the association between RF EMF exposure and cancer, also seen in limited human evidence. However, translating animal study results to human risk assessment remains complex, particularly due to uncertainties in exposure metrics and mechanisms of carcinogenicity. Other Notables - This review was partially funded by the WHO radioprotection programme. - The review protocol was registered under Prospero reg. no. CRD42021265563. 🟢 There is a direct connection between RF EMF exposure and increased cancer risk in experimental animals, emphasizing the need for continued evaluation in human studies and a precautionary approach to EMF exposure.

AI evidence extraction

At a glance
Study type
Systematic review
Effect direction
harm
Population
Experimental animals (laboratory animal studies)
Sample size
52
Exposure
RF
Evidence strength
High
Confidence: 86% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

This systematic review included 52 experimental animal studies (including 20 chronic bioassays) and used narrative synthesis due to heterogeneity. It reports high certainty of evidence for increased risk of malignant heart schwannomas and glial cell-derived brain neoplasms (gliomas) in male rats with RF EMF exposure, and moderate certainty for increased risks of several other cancers (e.g., lymphoma, pheochromocytoma, hepatoblastomas, lung neoplasms). Most studies reported no or minimal evidence of cancer effects in multiple other organ systems.

Outcomes measured

  • Cancer incidence (overall and by organ/tumor type)
  • Malignant heart schwannomas (male rats)
  • Glial cell-derived brain neoplasms / gliomas (male rats)
  • Lymphoma
  • Adrenal gland neoplasms (pheochromocytoma)
  • Liver tumors (hepatoblastomas)
  • Lung neoplasms

Limitations

  • Heterogeneity in species, exposure characteristics, and outcomes prevented quantitative meta-analysis
  • Uncertainties in exposure metrics and mechanisms complicate translation of animal findings to human risk assessment

Suggested hubs

  • who-icnirp (0.62)
    The abstract explicitly references WHO/IARC evaluations and notes partial funding by a WHO radioprotection programme.
View raw extracted JSON
{
    "publication_year": 2025,
    "study_type": "systematic_review",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "RF",
        "source": null,
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": "Experimental animals (laboratory animal studies)",
    "sample_size": 52,
    "outcomes": [
        "Cancer incidence (overall and by organ/tumor type)",
        "Malignant heart schwannomas (male rats)",
        "Glial cell-derived brain neoplasms / gliomas (male rats)",
        "Lymphoma",
        "Adrenal gland neoplasms (pheochromocytoma)",
        "Liver tumors (hepatoblastomas)",
        "Lung neoplasms"
    ],
    "main_findings": "This systematic review included 52 experimental animal studies (including 20 chronic bioassays) and used narrative synthesis due to heterogeneity. It reports high certainty of evidence for increased risk of malignant heart schwannomas and glial cell-derived brain neoplasms (gliomas) in male rats with RF EMF exposure, and moderate certainty for increased risks of several other cancers (e.g., lymphoma, pheochromocytoma, hepatoblastomas, lung neoplasms). Most studies reported no or minimal evidence of cancer effects in multiple other organ systems.",
    "effect_direction": "harm",
    "limitations": [
        "Heterogeneity in species, exposure characteristics, and outcomes prevented quantitative meta-analysis",
        "Uncertainties in exposure metrics and mechanisms complicate translation of animal findings to human risk assessment"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "high",
    "confidence": 0.85999999999999998667732370449812151491641998291015625,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "stance": "concern",
    "stance_confidence": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
    "summary": "This systematic review evaluated RF EMF exposure and cancer outcomes in experimental animals, including chronic cancer bioassays and tumor-promotion designs. Across 52 included studies, the authors report high certainty of evidence for increased malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas in male rats, and moderate certainty for increased risks of several other tumor types. Many other organ systems showed no or minimal evidence of carcinogenic effects, and the authors note challenges in translating animal findings to human risk assessment due to exposure and mechanistic uncertainties.",
    "key_points": [
        "The review included 52 animal studies, including 20 chronic cancer bioassays.",
        "Due to heterogeneity across studies, the authors did not perform a quantitative meta-analysis and instead used narrative synthesis.",
        "High certainty of evidence was reported for increased malignant heart schwannomas in male rats exposed to RF EMF.",
        "High certainty of evidence was reported for increased glial cell-derived brain neoplasms (gliomas) in male rats exposed to RF EMF.",
        "Moderate certainty of evidence was reported for increased risks of lymphoma, pheochromocytoma, hepatoblastomas, and lung neoplasms.",
        "Most studies reported no or minimal evidence of cancer effects in several other organ systems.",
        "The authors state that translating animal results to human risk assessment is complex due to uncertainties in exposure metrics and carcinogenic mechanisms."
    ],
    "categories": [
        "RF EMF",
        "Cancer",
        "Animal Studies",
        "Systematic Reviews"
    ],
    "tags": [
        "Radiofrequency EMF",
        "Cancer",
        "Laboratory Animal Studies",
        "Carcinogenicity",
        "Systematic Review",
        "Risk Of Bias",
        "GRADE",
        "Chronic Bioassay",
        "Schwannoma",
        "Glioma",
        "Male Rats",
        "Lymphoma",
        "Pheochromocytoma",
        "Hepatoblastoma",
        "Lung Neoplasms"
    ],
    "keywords": [
        "RF EMF",
        "cancer",
        "animal studies",
        "carcinogenicity",
        "systematic review",
        "schwannoma",
        "glioma"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "who-icnirp",
            "weight": 0.61999999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
            "reason": "The abstract explicitly references WHO/IARC evaluations and notes partial funding by a WHO radioprotection programme."
        }
    ],
    "social": {
        "tweet": "Systematic review (52 animal studies) on RF EMF and cancer reports high certainty of increased malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas in male rats, with moderate certainty for some other tumor types; many other organs showed no/minimal evidence. Env Int (2025).",
        "facebook": "A 2025 systematic review in Environment International assessed RF EMF exposure and cancer in laboratory animals (52 studies). The authors report high certainty of increased malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas in male rats, and moderate certainty for some other tumor types, while many other organs showed no or minimal evidence. They note uncertainties when translating animal findings to human risk assessment.",
        "linkedin": "Environment International (2025) published a systematic review of RF EMF exposure and cancer in laboratory animals (52 studies). Using RoB and adapted GRADE methods, the authors report high certainty of increased malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas in male rats, and moderate certainty for several other tumor outcomes, with many other organ systems showing no/minimal evidence. The paper highlights challenges in translating animal evidence to human risk assessment."
    }
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.