Literature DB >> 15221316

Threshold and other departures from linear-quadratic curvature in the non-cancer mortality dose-response curve in the Japanese atomic bomb survivors.

Mark P Little1.   

Abstract

Recently released data on non-cancer mortality in Japanese atomic bomb survivors are analysed using a variety of generalised relative risk models that take account of errors in estimates of dose to assess the dose-response at low doses. If linear-threshold, quadratic-threshold or linear-quadratic-threshold relative risk models (the dose-response is assumed to be linear, quadratic or linear-quadratic above the threshold, respectively) are fitted to the non-cancer data there are no statistically significant ( p>0.10) indications of threshold departures from linearity, quadratic curvature or linear-quadratic curvature. These findings are true irrespective of the assumed magnitude of dosimetric error, between 25%-45% geometric standard deviations. In general, increasing the assumed magnitude of dosimetric error had little effect on the central estimates of the threshold, but somewhat widened the associated confidence intervals. If a power of dose model is fitted, there is little evidence ( p>0.10) that the power of dose in the dose-response is statistically significantly different from 1, again irrespective of the assumed magnitude of dosimetric errors in the range 25%-45%. Again, increasing the size of the errors resulted in wider confidence intervals on the power of dose, without marked effect on the central estimates. In general these findings remain true for various non-cancer disease subtypes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15221316     DOI: 10.1007/s00411-004-0244-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys        ISSN: 0301-634X            Impact factor:   1.925


  29 in total

1.  Flexible dose-response models for Japanese atomic bomb survivor data: Bayesian estimation and prediction of cancer risk.

Authors:  James Bennett; Mark P Little; Sylvia Richardson
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2004-11-25       Impact factor: 1.925

2.  Comments on the article "Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, part I. Cancer: 1950-1990" by D. A. Pierce, Y. Shimizu. D. L. Preston, M. Vaeth and K. Mabuchi (Radiat. Res. 146, 1-27, 1996)

Authors:  M P Little
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 3.  Exposure measurement error: influence on exposure-disease. Relationships and methods of correction.

Authors:  D Thomas; D Stram; J Dwyer
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 21.981

4.  Absence of evidence for differences in the dose-response for cancer and non-cancer endpoints by acute injury status in the Japanese atomic-bomb survivors.

Authors:  Mark P Little
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.694

5.  Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, part II. Noncancer mortality: 1950-1990.

Authors:  Y Shimizu; D A Pierce; D L Preston; K Mabuchi
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  The shape of the cancer mortality dose-response curve for the A-bomb survivors.

Authors:  D A Pierce; M Vaeth
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  Curvilinearity in the dose-response curve for cancer in Japanese atomic bomb survivors.

Authors:  M P Little; C R Muirhead
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Curvature in the cancer mortality dose response in Japanese atomic bomb survivors: absence of evidence of threshold.

Authors:  M P Little; C R Muirhead
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.694

9.  Organ doses received by atomic bomb survivors during radiological examinations at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation.

Authors:  K Kazuo; S Antoku; S Sawada; W J Russell
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  Effects of low doses and low dose rates of external ionizing radiation: cancer mortality among nuclear industry workers in three countries.

Authors:  E Cardis; E S Gilbert; L Carpenter; G Howe; I Kato; B K Armstrong; V Beral; G Cowper; A Douglas; J Fix
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 2.841

View more
  11 in total

1.  Flexible dose-response models for Japanese atomic bomb survivor data: Bayesian estimation and prediction of cancer risk.

Authors:  James Bennett; Mark P Little; Sylvia Richardson
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2004-11-25       Impact factor: 1.925

Review 2.  A review of non-cancer effects, especially circulatory and ocular diseases.

Authors:  Mark P Little
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  Point/Counterpoint: low-dose radiation is beneficial, not harmful.

Authors:  Mohan Doss; Mark P Little; Colin G Orton
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Lifetime Mortality Risk from Cancer and Circulatory Disease Predicted from the Japanese Atomic Bomb Survivor Life Span Study Data Taking Account of Dose Measurement Error.

Authors:  Mark P Little; David Pawel; Munechika Misumi; Nobuyuki Hamada; Harry M Cullings; Richard Wakeford; Kotaro Ozasa
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 2.841

5.  Use of the individual data of the A-bomb survivors for biologically based cancer models.

Authors:  Wolfgang F Heidenreich; H M Cullings
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2009-11-12       Impact factor: 1.925

6.  Association of chromosome translocation rate with low dose occupational radiation exposures in U.S. radiologic technologists.

Authors:  Mark P Little; Deukwoo Kwon; Kazataka Doi; Steven L Simon; Dale L Preston; Michele M Doody; Terrence Lee; Jeremy S Miller; Diane M Kampa; Parveen Bhatti; James D Tucker; Martha S Linet; Alice J Sigurdson
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 7.  Do non-targeted effects increase or decrease low dose risk in relation to the linear-non-threshold (LNT) model?

Authors:  M P Little
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2010-01-25       Impact factor: 2.433

Review 8.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of circulatory disease from exposure to low-level ionizing radiation and estimates of potential population mortality risks.

Authors:  Mark P Little; Tamara V Azizova; Dimitry Bazyka; Simon D Bouffler; Elisabeth Cardis; Sergey Chekin; Vadim V Chumak; Francis A Cucinotta; Florent de Vathaire; Per Hall; John D Harrison; Guido Hildebrandt; Victor Ivanov; Valeriy V Kashcheev; Sergiy V Klymenko; Michaela Kreuzer; Olivier Laurent; Kotaro Ozasa; Thierry Schneider; Soile Tapio; Andrew M Taylor; Ioanna Tzoulaki; Wendy L Vandoolaeghe; Richard Wakeford; Lydia B Zablotska; Wei Zhang; Steven E Lipshultz
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Impact of uncertainties in exposure assessment on estimates of thyroid cancer risk among Ukrainian children and adolescents exposed from the Chernobyl accident.

Authors:  Mark P Little; Alexander G Kukush; Sergii V Masiuk; Sergiy Shklyar; Raymond J Carroll; Jay H Lubin; Deukwoo Kwon; Alina V Brenner; Mykola D Tronko; Kiyohiko Mabuchi; Tetiana I Bogdanova; Maureen Hatch; Lydia B Zablotska; Valeriy P Tereshchenko; Evgenia Ostroumova; André C Bouville; Vladimir Drozdovitch; Mykola I Chepurny; Lina N Kovgan; Steven L Simon; Victor M Shpak; Ilya A Likhtarev
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A model of cardiovascular disease giving a plausible mechanism for the effect of fractionated low-dose ionizing radiation exposure.

Authors:  Mark P Little; Anna Gola; Ioanna Tzoulaki
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.