Literature DB >> 15223765

Henry S. Kaplan Distinguished Scientist Award 2003. The crooked shall be made straight; dose-response relationships for carcinogenesis.

E J Hall1.   

Abstract

Estimates of radiation-induced malignancies come principally from the atomic (A)-bomb survivors and show an excess incidence of carcinomas that is linearly related to dose from about 5 cGy to 2.5 Gy. Above and below this dose range there is considerable uncertainty about the shape of the dose-response relationship. Both the International Commission of Radiation Protected (ICRP) and the National Council of Radiation Protection (NCRP) suggest that cancer risks at doses lower than those at which direct epidemiological observations are possible should be obtained by a linear extrapolation from higher doses. The demonstrated bystander effect for irradiation exaggerates the consequences of small doses of radiation and implies that a linear extrapolation from high doses would underestimate low dose risks. It is possible to make estimates of the cancer risk of diagnostic radiological procedures. Helical computed tomography in children is of particular interest since it is rapidly increasing in use and the doses involved are close to the lower limit of significance in the A-bomb survivors. For example, an abdominal computed tomographic scan in a 1-year-old child can be estimated to result in a lifetime cancer risk of about 1:1000. In the context of radiotherapy, some normal tissues receive 70 Gy, while a larger volume receives a lower dose, but still far higher than the range for which data are available from the A-bomb survivors. Data are available for the risk of radiation-induced malignancies for patients who received radiotherapy, e.g. for prostate or cervical cancer. New technologies such as intensity modulated radiation therapy could result in a doubling of radiation-induced second cancers since the technique involves a larger total-body dose due to leakage radiation and the dose distribution obtained involves a larger volume of normal tissue exposed to lower radiation doses.

Entities:  

Keywords:  NASA Discipline Radiation Health; Non-NASA Center

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15223765     DOI: 10.1080/09553000410001695895

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol        ISSN: 0955-3002            Impact factor:   2.694


  20 in total

1.  Estimate of the uncertainties in the relative risk of secondary malignant neoplasms following proton therapy and intensity-modulated photon therapy.

Authors:  Jonas D Fontenot; Charles Bloch; David Followill; Uwe Titt; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Trimming exposure data, putting radiation workers at risk: improving disclosure and consent through a national radiation dose-registry.

Authors:  Kristin Shrader-Frechette
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-08-29       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Risk of radiogenic second cancers following volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton arc therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Carol Etzel; Andrew K Lee; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Heel spur radiotherapy and radiation carcinogenesis risk estimation.

Authors:  Serdar Surenkok; Bahar Dirican; Murat Beyzadeoglu; Kaan Oysul
Journal:  Radiat Med       Date:  2006-10

5.  Radiation risk estimates after radiotherapy: application of the organ equivalent dose concept to plateau dose-response relationships.

Authors:  Uwe Schneider; Barbara Kaser-Hotz
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2005-11-05       Impact factor: 1.925

Review 6.  Ionizing radiation-induced metabolic oxidative stress and prolonged cell injury.

Authors:  Edouard I Azzam; Jean-Paul Jay-Gerin; Debkumar Pain
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2011-12-17       Impact factor: 8.679

7.  High CT doses return to the agenda.

Authors:  W Rühm; R M Harrison
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 1.925

Review 8.  Current knowledge on tumour induction by computed tomography should be carefully used.

Authors:  Cristian Candela-Juan; Alegría Montoro; Enrique Ruiz-Martínez; Juan Ignacio Villaescusa; Luis Martí-Bonmatí
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Second cancers after fractionated radiotherapy: stochastic population dynamics effects.

Authors:  Rainer K Sachs; Igor Shuryak; David Brenner; Hatim Fakir; Lynn Hlatky; Philip Hahnfeldt
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2007-08-12       Impact factor: 2.691

Review 10.  Is there a place for quantitative risk assessment?

Authors:  Eric J Hall
Journal:  J Radiol Prot       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 1.394

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.