Literature DB >> 18157543

Cancer risk estimates from the combined Japanese A-bomb and Hodgkin cohorts for doses relevant to radiotherapy.

Uwe Schneider1, Linda Walsh.   

Abstract

Most information on the dose-response of radiation-induced cancer is derived from data on the A-bomb survivors who were exposed to gamma-rays and neutrons. Since, for radiation protection purposes, the dose span of main interest is between 0 and 1 Gy, the analysis of the A-bomb survivors is usually focused on this range. However, estimates of cancer risk for doses above 1 Gy are becoming more important for radiotherapy patients and for long-term manned missions in space research. Therefore in this work, emphasis is placed on doses relevant for radiotherapy with respect to radiation-induced solid cancer. The analysis of the A-bomb survivor's data was extended by including two extra high-dose categories (4-6 Sv and 6-13 Sv) and by an attempted combination with cancer data on patients receiving radiotherapy for Hodgkin's disease. In addition, since there are some recent indications for a high neutron dose contribution, the data were fitted separately for three different values for the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of the neutrons (10, 35 and 100) and a variable RBE as a function of dose. The data were fitted using a linear, a linear-exponential and a plateau-dose-response relationship. Best agreement was found for the plateau model with a dose-varying RBE. It can be concluded that for doses above 1 Gy there is a tendency for a nonlinear dose-response curve. In addition, there is evidence of a neutron RBE greater than 10 for the A-bomb survivor data. Many problems and uncertainties are involved in combing these two datasets. However, since very little is currently known about the shape of dose-response relationships for radiation-induced cancer in the radiotherapy dose range, this approach could be regarded as a first attempt to acquire more information on this area. The work presented here also provides the first direct evidence that the bending over of the solid cancer excess risk dose response curve for the A-bomb survivors, generally observed above 2 Gy, is due to cell killing effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18157543     DOI: 10.1007/s00411-007-0151-y

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


  28 in total

1.  Radiation carcinogenesis modelling for risk of treatment-related second tumours following radiotherapy.

Authors:  K A Lindsay; E G Wheldon; C Deehan; T E Wheldon
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Risk estimation for fast neutrons with regard to solid cancer.

Authors:  A M Kellerer; L Walsh
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 3.  Radiation dosimetry and biophysical models of space radiation effects.

Authors:  Francis A Cucinotta; Honglu Wu; Mark R Shavers; Kerry George
Journal:  Gravit Space Biol Bull       Date:  2003-06

Review 4.  Radiation therapy in the management of Hodgkin's disease.

Authors:  R T Hoppe
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 4.929

5.  Allowing for random errors in radiation dose estimates for the atomic bomb survivor data.

Authors:  D A Pierce; D O Stram; M Vaeth
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  Indications of the neutron effect contribution in the solid cancer data of the A-bomb survivors.

Authors:  Albrecht M Kellerer; Werner Rühm; Linda Walsh
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 1.316

7.  Computerized three-dimensional segmented human anatomy.

Authors:  I G Zubal; C R Harrell; E O Smith; Z Rattner; G Gindi; P B Hoffer
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Dose-effect models for risk-relationship to cell survival parameters.

Authors:  Alexandru Daşu; Iuliana Toma-Daşu
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.089

9.  Second malignant neoplasms among long-term survivors of Hodgkin's disease: a population-based evaluation over 25 years.

Authors:  Graça M Dores; Catherine Metayer; Rochelle E Curtis; Charles F Lynch; E Aileen Clarke; Bengt Glimelius; Hans Storm; Eero Pukkala; Flora E van Leeuwen; Eric J Holowaty; Michael Andersson; Tom Wiklund; Timo Joensuu; Mars B van't Veer; Marilyn Stovall; Mary Gospodarowicz; Lois B Travis
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 10.  Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT.

Authors:  Eric J Hall; Cheng-Shie Wuu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2003-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

View more
  28 in total

1.  A new view of radiation-induced cancer.

Authors:  I Shuryak; R K Sachs; D J Brenner
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2010-11-27       Impact factor: 0.972

2.  Model of accelerated carcinogenesis based on proliferative stress and inflammation for doses relevant to radiotherapy.

Authors:  Uwe Schneider; Brigitte Schäfer
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  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

4.  Impact of lifetime attributable risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer in proton craniospinal irradiation with vertebral-body-sparing for young pediatric patients with medulloblastoma.

Authors:  Shunsuke Suzuki; Takahiro Kato; Masao Murakami
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 2.724

5.  Abdominal pediatric cancer surveillance using serial computed tomography: evaluation of organ absorbed dose and effective dose.

Authors:  Diana Lam; Sandra L Wootton-Gorges; John P McGahan; Robin Stern; John M Boone
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 6.  Assessment of the risk for developing a second malignancy from scattered and secondary radiation in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.316

7.  Comparison of risk of radiogenic second cancer following photon and proton craniospinal irradiation for a pediatric medulloblastoma patient.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Rebecca M Howell; Annelise Giebeler; Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Risk-optimized proton therapy to minimize radiogenic second cancers.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; John G Eley; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Calculating and estimating second cancer risk from breast radiotherapy using Monte Carlo code with internal body scatter for each out-of-field organ.

Authors:  Takeshi Takata; Kenshiro Shiraishi; Shinobu Kumagai; Norikazu Arai; Takenori Kobayashi; Hiroshi Oba; Takahide Okamoto; Jun'ichi Kotoku
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  A new view of radiation-induced cancer: integrating short- and long-term processes. Part I: approach.

Authors:  Igor Shuryak; Philip Hahnfeldt; Lynn Hlatky; Rainer K Sachs; David J Brenner
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 1.925

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.