Literature DB >> 12852470

Dose response and temporal patterns of radiation-associated solid cancer risks.

D L Preston1, D A Pierce, Y Shimizu, E Ron, K Mabuchi.   

Abstract

Findings of the Life Span Study (LSS) cohort of atomic-bomb survivors are a primary source for quantitative risk estimates that underlie radiation protection. Because of the size and length of follow-up, the LSS provides considerable information on both the nature of the dose response and on how radiation-associated excess risks vary with age, age at exposure, sex, and other factors. Our current analyses extend the mortality follow-up by 7 y (through 1997) and add 8 y (through 1995) to the incidence follow-up. During the follow-up periods there have been a total of about 9,300 solid cancer deaths and almost 12,200 incident cases. As outlined in this presentation, while discussing issues related to the shape of the dose response and low dose risks in some detail, the new reports consider temporal patterns in greater detail than has been done previously. As we have reported, the LSS solid cancer dose response is well described by simple linear dose response over the 0 to 2 Sv range (with some leveling off at higher estimated doses). This remains the case with the extended follow-up. Although LSS is often referred to as a high dose study, about 75% of the 50,000 cohort members with doses in excess of 5 mSv have dose estimates in a range of direct interest for radiation protection (0-200 mSv). Analyses of data limited to this low dose range provide direct evidence of a significant solid cancer dose response with a risk per unit dose that is consistent with that seen for the full dose range. Previous LSS reports have focused on descriptions of the solid cancer excess risks in which the excess relative risk varies with age at exposure and sex. In addition to the age at exposure effects, our current analyses suggest excess relative risks also vary with age (at death or diagnosis). Excess relative risks are higher for those exposed earlier in life, with attained age-specific risks changing by about 20% per decade, but tend to decrease with increasing attained age, roughly in proportion to (1/attained-age)1.5, for any age at exposure. Despite the decreasing relative risk, excess rates have increased rapidly throughout the study period with some indication, especially for the incidence data, that attained-age-specific rates are higher for those exposed at younger ages. Simple comparisons of site-specific excess risks are used to illustrate how the interpretation of age-at-exposure effects on excess relative risks or excess rates is complicated by changes in baseline rates with birth cohort or time period.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12852470     DOI: 10.1097/00004032-200307000-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Phys        ISSN: 0017-9078            Impact factor:   1.316


  20 in total

1.  Radiation dose associated with renal failure mortality: a potential pathway to partially explain increased cardiovascular disease mortality observed after whole-body irradiation.

Authors:  Michael Jacob Adams; Eric J Grant; Kazunori Kodama; Yukiko Shimizu; Fumiyoshi Kasagi; Akihiko Suyama; Ritsu Sakata; Masazumi Akahoshi
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 2.  Stromal mediation of radiation carcinogenesis.

Authors:  Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2010-12-23       Impact factor: 2.673

3.  Invited commentary: is it time to retire the "pack-years" variable? Maybe not!

Authors:  Duncan C Thomas
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Imaging for appendicitis: should radiation-induced cancer risks affect modality selection?

Authors:  Sorapop Kiatpongsan; Lesley Meng; Jonathan D Eisenberg; Maurice Herring; Laura L Avery; Chung Yin Kong; Pari V Pandharipande
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Reduction in Radiation Dose in a Pediatric Cardiac Catheterization Lab Using the Philips AlluraClarity X-ray System.

Authors:  Patrick M Sullivan; David Harrison; Sarah Badran; Cheryl M Takao; Frank F Ing
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 1.655

6.  The new radiobiology: returning to our roots.

Authors:  Brant A Ulsh
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-07-15       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 7.  New biological insights on the link between radiation exposure and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 2.673

8.  Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Jafi Lipson; Ralph Marcus; Kwang-Pyo Kim; Mahadevappa Mahesh; Robert Gould; Amy Berrington de González; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-12-14

9.  Patients with testicular cancer undergoing CT surveillance demonstrate a pitfall of radiation-induced cancer risk estimates: the timing paradox.

Authors:  Pari V Pandharipande; Jonathan D Eisenberg; Richard J Lee; Michael E Gilmore; Ekin A Turan; Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Bob Liu; Chung Yin Kong; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 10.  Childhood exposure to external ionising radiation and solid cancer risk.

Authors:  S Sadetzki; L Mandelzweig
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-04-07       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.