Massachusetts Nurses in One Hospital Unit Diagnosed with Brain Tumors
Nurses call for an independent investigation after spike in benign tumors cases at a maternity ward.
A troubling development has occurred at Newton-Wellesley Hospital in Massachusetts, as multiple nurses working in the same unit have been diagnosed with brain tumors. The cases have prompted investigations by both the hospital and the Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA), raising questions about potential environmental or occupational causes.
As of April 1, officials from Mass General Brigham’s Newton-Wellesley Hospital told NBC10 Boston they have interviewed 11 staffers from various shifts on the fifth-floor maternal care labor and delivery unit.
So far, they’ve identified five cases of three different types of brain tumors, all benign. Six other cases were ruled out as brain tumors and classified as “other health concerns.”
However, a nurse recently diagnosed with a brain tumor claims that as many as 10 employees on the floor have been struck by different brain tumors in recent years — some of which were cancerous.
Up to 10 nurses diagnosed with brain tumors. That is not normal.
Nurses at Massachusetts hospital concerned about growing number of cancer cases among staff – CBS Boston https://t.co/1fctm3Lslb
— Brian Tyson, MD 🇺🇸 (@btysonmd) March 31, 2025
There are questions being raised about the extent of the hospital investigation, and a nurses’ union is following up with a more extensive review of staff medical records.
“After we became aware of reported brain tumors in individuals who currently or previously had worked in the same area of the hospital, we conducted an extensive investigation in collaboration with the Department of Occupational Health and Safety, Newton-Wellesley Safety Officer, radiation and pharmaceutical safety offices, and external environmental consultants,” the hospital said in a statement.
“Every staff member who came forward was given the opportunity to be interviewed by the Occupational Health and Safety team to evaluate each diagnosis in the context of their individual medical history and risk factors. To evaluate for any possible environmental exposures in that area of the hospital, comprehensive environmental assessments following CDC guidelines began in December.
“The investigation found no environmental risks which could be linked to the development of a brain tumor.”
The Massachusetts Nurses Association told the outlet that the hospital’s environmental testing was not comprehensive. A union representative said it had received more than 300 responses from people at Newton-Wellesley and is working to obtain medical records and provide a direct follow-up.
The nurses are also calling for an independent investigation. It must be noted that some of the diagnoses pre-date covid.
…[D]espite the investigation, as worries persist, the nurses are calling for an independent investigation.
Paula Ward of the Massachusetts Nurse Association told the outlet:’ I think the concern is [that] we don’t know what it is, and nurses are scared, they’re worried, and they want to make sure they’re not working in an unsafe place.’
‘I think the nurses should be the first people – because we’re the ones that brought it to their attention – to be told, and we feel like we have been the last to be informed on anything,’ the anonymous nurse added.
A spokesperson for Newton-Wellesley Hospital confirmed that not all of the nurses were on the unit at the same time and noted that some of the diagnoses pre-date the Covid-19 pandemic.
Studies of occupational diseases related to brain tumor development show a wide array of industries are at higher risk, but none of them are related to situations association with nursing.
“Brain cancer incidence and mortality have been increasing in many industrialized countries, particularly among elderly people,” said Tongzhang Zheng, associate professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at Yale School of Medicine and principal investigator of the findings published in a recent issue of the journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. “Improved diagnosis and access to medical care, genetic predisposition, and lifestyle factors, such as smoking, drinking alcohol and diet, are not enough to explain the increase.”
“The major findings of this investigation were that an increased risk of brain cancer was associated with agricultural industry and farm occupations; industries producing rubber and miscellaneous plastic products; industries and occupations which have a potential for exposure to gasoline or solvents; industries producing apparel and other textile products; employment in electric services, and electrical and electronic equipment, plumbing, heating, and air conditioning, and sheet metal working industries,” Zheng said.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Nuclear medicine source abandoned in an area where nurses for the maternity ward gather?
Perhaps that is what is in the container that sits far back in the cabinet in their break room.
Was one of my first thoughts too.
It’s a fair guess but begs the question of why it only seems to be brain tumors. A generalized radiation source like that, not aimed at a specific part of the body, should be causing cancers in various parts of peoples’ bodies, not just the brain.
Bingo. Precisely my second thought.
If some “environmental” factor is causing a cluster of brain tumors, it’s way more likely to be chemical, something that would gravitate to specific preferred areas.
Like a hot batch of vaxx, for example.
They reported brain tumors but were there any other cancers in the same population? Brain is pretty specific.
Also, is it only nurses?
This sounds like a Dr. House Episode,
Except it’s RL for those poor nurses.
One assumes someone has walked around with a radiation detector. But maybe not.
Would have been picked up by a geiger counter, and radiation leaks is probably the first thing they screened.
Weird. 10 incidents of brain tumors in one department is obviously statistically significant. It might make some sense if this were happening in radiology/nuclear medicine are. While there are a lot of products that are used exclusively in the maternity ward, most of it is disposable materials that are not fundamentally different from other kinds of consumables other departments use, like ICU & ER…except RFID baby tags and that’s probably not it. There are some drugs that are generally only used in maternity wards, like Oxytocin. While nurses are administering these drugs, coming into physical contact with them almost never happens, so that seems unlikely. I wonder what the proximity of their maternity ward is to nuclear medicine. Do they share a common wall?
Maybe radiology as a contributing factor? If infants need X-Ray they probably have to be positioned manually so I can see it as a potentially contributing factor….investigate to rule it out if nothing else… but ten cases seems far out of the ordinary.
Although it should be looked into and not shrugged off, 10 cases in one hospital department is not quite “obviously statistically significant”. It might be – but sometimes you do roll snake-eyes ten times in a row with honest dice.
The problem with that take is that statistics concern itself with large populations and sample sizes. The population of pediatric nurses in (say) a state is huge – in a single hospital, not so much. As an example, in a perfectly random dice or coin toss example, you will inevitably get runs of unlikely results grouped together – in any large enuf #of tosses. If you roll snake-eyes or heads 10 times in a roll within a population of 2,000 tosses the dice or coin MAY be at fault – but that’s not proof anything other than randomness is at fault.
It’s been a while since I’ve had a statistics class. But, in a cluster analysis of the larger hospital staff, wouldn’t any cluster producing an outcome literally orders of magnitude greater than typical US population (<10 in 100K develop brain tumors) be a textbook example of statistical significance? This of course presumes that the article is correct and this kind of cancer prevalence wasn't replicated in any other department. While the cluster itself wouldn't proof of non-occupational causes, it would clearly be an indicator for more intensive study.
When I got breast cancer , another nurse in the same unit , same shift got breast cancer.
Then another nurse in the same shift and unit got Colon cancer.
Several
Other nurses on other units also got cancer in a 5-7 year span. Different cancers, different shifts
I always thought there was a connection. It was an old hospital, actually made to be a hotel that was converted originally. I would see black mold in places, hidden, point it out to administrators and then right before any official inspection for accreditation, they would paint over it.
But I always thought it was in the air system, we had a vent in the muskrats station that blew like a northerner at night down upon our heads.
I would put cardboard over the vent at night.
They are about to tear the old place down, last chance of getting anyone in there to inspect it.
While theoretically possible, I would defy anyone to say they have actually seen dice roll snake eyes 10 times in a row.
The odds are actually
1 in 36 times 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, otherwise known as an undecillion.
I have no idea how many nurses have rotated through that maternity and neonatal unit, but I doubt if its an undecillion.
Anecdotally, we once lived in a very small town in wheat farming country; I sang in the church choir and 4 out of 6 members (I was one of the 2 lucky ones) had current or past cancer diagnoses. Total population of the town and surrounding area was under 500 people.
I always assumed it was the high levels of nitrate in our drinking water.
I worked in table games in casinos for over 30 years and you are correct snake eyes 10 times in a row is nearly impossible. That is a bad comparison. I think I’ve seen 2 or 12 rolled 4 times in a row.
Bynum, North Carolina comes to mind. Also the Mattel factory in Beaverton, Oregon, where they discharged solvents onto the property, which also had a well for water.
There are a number of Forensic Epidemiology books out there. Fascinating reads for those who want to expand the box of possibilities in situations like this.
“The Orange Man and Other Narratives of Medical Detection” is a good starter.
I used to go to this hospital all the time but not to the maternity ward. Xray department was on the first floor but don’t recall whether nuclear med was co located. 5th floor would be weird place to store radioactive isotopes or waste.
They’ve only mentioned nurses but there are a lot of other employees too. If none of them developed a brain tumor that would be pretty interesting.
Either way it would seem prudent to move the unit and then send in a hazmat team to tear the place apart.
Another writeup that contains additional information.
https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2025/04/06/hospital-responds-after-multiple-nurses-in-same-unit-report-having-brain-tumors/