. 2023 Oct 18;131(10):107008. doi: 10.1289/EHP12634

Table 4.

Sensitivity analyses of the association between childhood acute leukemia and density of vines within $1,000 meters$ of the geocoded address (GEOCAP, inclusions 2006–2013, GIS-based assessment of exposure based on RPG and CLC).

Density within $1,000 meters$	Controls	All acute leukemia					Acute lymphoblastic leukemia					Acute myeloid leukemia
	$n$	$n$	RPG and CLC		RPG alone		$n$	RPG and CLC		RPG alone		$n$	RPG and CLC		RPG alone
	$n$	$n$	OR (95% CI)^a	$p$ ^a	OR (95% CI)^a	$p$ ^a	$n$	OR (95% CI)^a	$p$ ^a	OR (95% CI)^a	$p$ ^a	$n$	OR (95% CI)^a	$p$ ^a	OR (95% CI)^a	$p$ ^a
Main analyses	40,196	3,711	1.04 (0.99, 1.08)	0.05	1.07 (0.95, 1.20)	0.15	3,088	1.05 (1.00, 1.09)	0.03	1.12 (0.99, 1.26)	0.04	552	0.95 (0.84, 1.08)	0.77	0.73 (0.47, 1.13)	0.92
Adjustment for density of other crops^b	40,196	3,711	1.04 (1.00, 1.08)	0.04	1.07 (0.95,1.20)	0.14	3,088	1.05 (1.00,1.10)	0.02	1.12 (0.99,1.26)	0.04	552	0.95 (0.84,1.08)	0.79	0.73 (0.47,1.13)	0.92
Only the best geocoded addresses^c	33,235	3,015	1.05 (0.99, 1.10)	0.05	1.07 (0.92, 1.24)	0.21	2,506	1.06 (1.01, 1.12)	0.02	1.13 (0.97, 1.32)	0.06	446	0.94 (0.80, 1.11)	0.78	0.58 (0.29, 1.18)	0.93
Only the 8 most intensive wine-growing regions^d	23,643	2,231	1.03 (0.99, 1.08)	0.07	1.05 (0.94, 1.19)	0.20	1,877	1.04 (0.99, 1.09)	0.05	1.10 (0.97, 1.24)	0.07	309	0.97 (0.85, 1.10)	0.70	0.75 (0.49, 1.17)	0.90
Only children with crops within $1,000 meters$	30,532	2,814	1.04 (0.99, 1.08)	0.05	1.06 (0.95, 1.20)	0.15	2,380	1.04 (1.00, 1.09)	0.04	1.10 (0.98, 1.25)	0.06	379	0.98 (0.87, 1.11)	0.63	0.79 (0.51, 1.21)	0.86
Adjustment for potential confounders
Size of urban unit^e	40,196	3,711	1.03 (0.99, 1.08)	0.08	1.05 (0.93, 1.18)	0.22	3,088	1.04 (0.99, 1.08)	0.07	1.08 (0.96, 1.23)	0.10	552	0.97 (0.86, 1.10)	0.68	0.76 (0.49, 1.18)	0.89
Municipality deprivation index^f	40,196	3,711	1.04 (1.00, 1.08)	0.04	1.07 (0.95, 1.20)	0.14	3,088	1.05 (1.00, 1.09)	0.03	1.12 (0.99, 1.26)	0.04	552	0.96 (0.85, 1.08)	0.76	0.73 (0.47, 1.14)	0.92
Length of major roads within $150 meters$ ^g	40,196	3,711	1.04 (1.00, 1.08)	0.04	1.07 (0.95, 1.20)	0.14	3,088	1.05 (1.00, 1.09)	0.03	1.11 (0.99, 1.26)	0.04	552	0.96 (0.85, 1.09)	0.75	0.74 (0.48, 1.14)	0.91
Average UV radiation in the municipality^h	40,196	3,711	1.04 (1.00, 1.09)	0.04	1.07 (0.95, 1.21)	0.13	3,088	1.05 (1.00, 1.10)	0.02	1.12 (0.99, 1.27)	0.04	552	0.96 (0.84, 1.09)	0.75	0.73 (0.47, 1.15)	0.91
All above potential confounders	40,196	3,711	1.03 (0.99, 1.08)	0.07	1.05 (0.93, 1.19)	0.20	3,088	1.04 (0.99, 1.09)	0.07	1.09 (0.96, 1.23)	0.10	552	0.98 (0.86, 1.12)	0.61	0.78 (0.51, 1.22)	0.86

Note: CI, confidence interval; CLC, Corine Land Cover; OR, odds ratio; RPG, Graphic Parcel Register.

^{^a}

OR for a 10% increase in viticulture density (based on RPG and CLC sources and RPG alone) and 95% CI estimated by unconditional logistic regression adjusted for age. $p$ -values are one-sided.

^{^b}

Inclusion in the model of the proportion of buffer area allocated to crops other than vines.

^{^c}

Analyses based on children with the best geocoded addresses: geocoding incertitude $less than 100 meters$ .

^{^d}

Exclusion of the Bretagne, Hauts-de-France, Ile-de-France and Normandie regions.

^{^e}

Adjustment for urban unit size using 4 population categories: $less than 5,000$ , 5,000–19,999, 20,000–99,999, $greater than or equal to 100,000$ inhabitants.

^{^f}

Adjustment for the 2006 Fdep deprivation index.

^{^g}

Adjustment for the length of major roads within $150 meters$ (OR for a $300 meters$ increase in road length).

^{^h}

Adjustment for the average daily UV radiation level in the municipality (OR for an increase of $25 joules per centimeter squared$ ).