Living near Superfund sites can significantly elevate the risk of developing metastatic and triple-negative breast cancer, according to research from Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center. Members of our community raised concerns that where they lived was making people sick,
said Erin Kobetz, an epidemiologist, associate director for community outreach and engagement at Sylvester, and the Judy H. Schulte Senior Endowed Chair in Cancer Research, as reported by the University of Miami. Community concerns catalyzed research examining environmental factors and cancer outcomes across Florida, where 52 active Superfund sites are located.
Environmental Hazards and Breast Cancer Risks
In a study analyzing more than 21,000 breast cancer cases diagnosed in Florida from 2015 to 2019, researchers found that residing in the same census tract as at least one Superfund site increases the likelihood of metastasized breast cancer by about 30%. Further investigation into triple-negative breast cancer revealed that proximity to Superfund sites also heightens the risk for this aggressive subtype. Additionally, researchers reported that higher exposure to particulate matter 2.5 (PM2.5)—a pollutant smaller than 2.5 microns—leads to a higher risk of triple-negative breast cancer in South Florida.
Socioeconomic Deprivation and Screening Uptake
Research indicates that patients living in more deprived areas experience lower screening uptake for certain cancers. A London-based study examining records of 159,000 women aged 50 to 52 evaluated whether they attended their first routine breast cancer screening appointment between 2006 and 2009. The largest attendance difference occurred in South East London, where 73% of women in the most affluent areas attended their appointments, compared with 59% in the most deprived areas, according to findings presented at Public Health England’s National Cancer Intelligence Network annual conference and detailed by GOV.UK.
It’s worrying that breast cancer screening uptake is different depending on the deprivation of the area women live in,
said lead author Ruth Jack, an epidemiologist from Public Health England London. Dr. Mick Peake, clinical lead at Public Health England’s National Cancer Intelligence Network, noted that the London study adds weight to evidence showing that patients from deprived areas access cancer screening less frequently.
In contrast, other studies examining sociodemographic factors found different patterns. Research involving Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients eligible for lung cancer screening found that the Neighborhood Deprivation Index quartiles were not significantly associated with initial low-dose computed tomography chest completion, as published in Frontiersin.
National Screening Rates and Context
Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related death globally and in the United States. According to American Cancer Society annual cancer statistics published in 2025, lung cancer caused more deaths in 2022 than colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers combined. Despite recommendations from the United States Preventive Services Task Force—first adopted in 2015 following the National Lung Screening Trial Research Team’s publication of a 20% relative reduction in mortality from low-dose computed tomography screening—national uptake remains low.
Every year, only about 5% of eligible adults in the United States considered at risk for lung cancer are screened. This rate is at least ten times lower than annual national screening rates for colorectal, cervical, or breast cancers. At Kaiser Permanente Northern California, the average annual completion rate of initial lung cancer screening was 0.95% under 2013 guidelines, while only 0.69% of eligible participants completed screening in 2022 under 2021 guidelines.
