Literature DB >> 15987704

Risk of cancer after low doses of ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study in 15 countries.

E Cardis1, M Vrijheid, M Blettner, E Gilbert, M Hakama, C Hill, G Howe, J Kaldor, C R Muirhead, M Schubauer-Berigan, T Yoshimura, F Bermann, G Cowper, J Fix, C Hacker, B Heinmiller, M Marshall, I Thierry-Chef, D Utterback, Y-O Ahn, E Amoros, P Ashmore, A Auvinen, J-M Bae, J Bernar Solano, A Biau, E Combalot, P Deboodt, A Diez Sacristan, M Eklof, H Engels, G Engholm, G Gulis, R Habib, K Holan, H Hyvonen, A Kerekes, J Kurtinaitis, H Malker, M Martuzzi, A Mastauskas, A Monnet, M Moser, M S Pearce, D B Richardson, F Rodriguez-Artalejo, A Rogel, H Tardy, M Telle-Lamberton, I Turai, M Usel, K Veress.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To provide direct estimates of risk of cancer after protracted low doses of ionising radiation and to strengthen the scientific basis of radiation protection standards for environmental, occupational, and medical diagnostic exposures.
DESIGN: Multinational retrospective cohort study of cancer mortality.
SETTING: Cohorts of workers in the nuclear industry in 15 countries. PARTICIPANTS: 407 391 workers individually monitored for external radiation with a total follow-up of 5.2 million person years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Estimates of excess relative risks per sievert (Sv) of radiation dose for mortality from cancers other than leukaemia and from leukaemia excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, the main causes of death considered by radiation protection authorities.
RESULTS: The excess relative risk for cancers other than leukaemia was 0.97 per Sv, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.97. Analyses of causes of death related or unrelated to smoking indicate that, although confounding by smoking may be present, it is unlikely to explain all of this increased risk. The excess relative risk for leukaemia excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia was 1.93 per Sv (< 0 to 8.47). On the basis of these estimates, 1-2% of deaths from cancer among workers in this cohort may be attributable to radiation.
CONCLUSIONS: These estimates, from the largest study of nuclear workers ever conducted, are higher than, but statistically compatible with, the risk estimates used for current radiation protection standards. The results suggest that there is a small excess risk of cancer, even at the low doses and dose rates typically received by nuclear workers in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15987704      PMCID: PMC558612          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38499.599861.E0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  14 in total

1.  Study of a selection of 10 historical types of dosemeter: variation of the response to Hp(10) with photon energy and geometry of exposure.

Authors:  I Thierry-Chef; F Pernicka; M Marshall; E Cardis; P Andreo
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 0.972

2.  Life-style and other characteristics of radiation workers at nuclear facilities in Japan: base-line data of a questionnaire survey.

Authors:  Motoi Murata; Toshio Miyake; Yasushi Inoue; Sumio Ohshima; Shin-ichi Kudo; Takesumi Yoshimura; Suminori Akiba; Toshiro Tango; Yasuhiko Yoshimoto; Yukiko Shimizu; Tomotaka Sobue; Shizuyo Kusumi; Tamiko Iwasaki; Chikao Yamagishi; Hiromichi Matsudaira
Journal:  J Epidemiol       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 3.211

3.  Trends in US smoking rates in occupational groups: the National Health Interview Survey 1987-1994.

Authors:  David J Lee; William LeBlanc; Lora E Fleming; Orlando Gómez-Marín; Terry Pitman
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.162

4.  Tobacco smoke and involuntary smoking.

Authors: 
Journal:  IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum       Date:  2004

5.  Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de González; Sarah Darby
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-01-31       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950-1990.

Authors:  D A Pierce; Y Shimizu; D L Preston; M Vaeth; K Mabuchi
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  A case-cohort study of lung cancer, ionizing radiation, and tobacco smoking among males at the Hanford Site.

Authors:  G R Petersen; E S Gilbert; J A Buchanan; R G Stevens
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 1.316

8.  Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 13: Solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950-1997.

Authors:  Dale L Preston; Yukiko Shimizu; Donald A Pierce; Akihiko Suyama; Kiyohiko Mabuchi
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.841

9.  Direct estimates of cancer mortality due to low doses of ionising radiation: an international study. IARC Study Group on Cancer Risk among Nuclear Industry Workers.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1994-10-15       Impact factor: 79.321

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
  136 in total

Review 1.  Exposing the thyroid to radiation: a review of its current extent, risks, and implications.

Authors:  Bridget Sinnott; Elaine Ron; Arthur B Schneider
Journal:  Endocr Rev       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 19.871

Review 2.  Incidental findings found in "healthy" volunteers during imaging performed for research: current legal and ethical implications.

Authors:  T C Booth; A Jackson; J M Wardlaw; S A Taylor; A D Waldman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  Effects of radiation exposure from cardiac imaging: how good are the data?

Authors:  Andrew J Einstein
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 4.  Cancer risks associated with external radiation from diagnostic imaging procedures.

Authors:  Martha S Linet; Thomas L Slovis; Donald L Miller; Ruth Kleinerman; Choonsik Lee; Preetha Rajaraman; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2012-02-03       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 5.  Cancer risk related to gastrointestinal diagnostic radiation exposure.

Authors:  Mimi L Chang; Jason K Hou
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2011-10

6.  Mortality risk in a historical cohort of nuclear power plant workers in Germany: results from a second follow-up.

Authors:  Hiltrud Merzenich; Gaël P Hammer; Katrin Tröltzsch; Kai Ruecker; Johanna Buncke; Franz Fehringer; Maria Blettner
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 1.925

7.  2014 KLCSG-NCC Korea Practice Guideline for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors: 
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2015-05-23       Impact factor: 4.519

8.  Radiation exposure from diagnostic procedures following allogeneic stem cell transplantation--how much is acceptable?

Authors:  Minoo Battiwalla; Farhad Fakhrejahani; Natasha A Jain; Jeffrey K Klotz; Priyanka A Pophali; Debbie Draper; Janice Haggerty; Zachariah McIver; James Jelinek; Kamna Chawla; Sawa Ito; John Barrett
Journal:  Hematology       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 2.269

9.  Ionizing radiation and risk of chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the 15-country study of nuclear industry workers.

Authors:  Martine Vrijheid; Elisabeth Cardis; Patrick Ashmore; Anssi Auvinen; Ethel Gilbert; Rima R Habib; Hans Malker; Colin R Muirhead; David B Richardson; Agnes Rogel; Mary Schubauer-Berigan; Hélène Tardy; Maylis Telle-Lamberton
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 2.841

10.  Head computed tomography utilization and intracranial hemorrhage rates.

Authors:  Jarone Lee; C Scott Evans; Neil Singh; Jonathan Kirschner; Daniel Runde; David Newman; Dan Wiener; Josh Quaas; Kaushal Shah
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2012-12-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.