Literature DB >> 18334707

Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in utero or as young children.

Dale L Preston1, Harry Cullings, Akihiko Suyama, Sachiyo Funamoto, Nobuo Nishi, Midori Soda, Kiyohiko Mabuchi, Kazunori Kodama, Fumiyoshi Kasagi, Roy E Shore.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In utero exposure to radiation is known to increase risks of childhood cancers, and childhood exposure is associated with increased risks of adult-onset cancers. However, little is known about whether in utero exposure to radiation increases risks of adult-onset cancers.
METHODS: Solid cancer incidence rates were examined among survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who were in utero (n = 2452) or younger than 6 years (n = 15388) at the time of the bombings. Poisson regression was used to estimate and compare the levels and temporal patterns of the radiation-associated excess risks of first primary solid cancers among these survivors at ages 12-55. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: There were 94 eligible cancers in the in utero group and 649 in the early childhood group. The excess relative risk (ERR) increased with dose for both in utero (age 50, ERR = 1.0 per Sv, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.2 to 2.3 per Sv) and early childhood (age 50, ERR = 1.7 per Sv, 95% CI = 1.1 to 2.5 Sv) exposures. The ERR declined (P = .046) with increasing attained age in the combined cohort. Excess absolute rates (EARs) increased markedly with attained age among those exposed in early childhood but exhibited little change in the in utero group. At age 50, the estimated EARs per 10,000 person-years per Sv were 6.8 (95% CI = <0 to 49) for those exposed in utero and 56 (95% CI = 36 to 79) for those exposed as young children.
CONCLUSIONS: Both the in utero and early childhood groups exhibited statistically significant dose-related increases in incidence rates of solid cancers. The apparent difference in EARs between the two groups suggests that lifetime risks following in utero exposure may be considerably lower than for early childhood exposure, but further follow-up is needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18334707     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djn045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  78 in total

1.  Is routine pelvic surveillance imaging necessary in patients with Wilms tumor?

Authors:  Sue C Kaste; Samuel L Brady; Brian Yee; Valerie J McPherson; Robert A Kaufman; Catherine A Billups; Najat C Daw; Alberto S Pappo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 2.  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 3.  Evaluation and follow-up of patients with urinary lithiasis: minimizing radiation exposure.

Authors:  Elias S Hyams; Ojas Shah
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.092

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

5.  The balance between initiation and promotion in radiation-induced murine carcinogenesis.

Authors:  Igor Shuryak; Robert L Ullrich; Rainer K Sachs; David J Brenner
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  Cancer risks after radiation exposure in middle age.

Authors:  Igor Shuryak; Rainer K Sachs; David J Brenner
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Increased lung and bladder cancer incidence in adults after in utero and early-life arsenic exposure.

Authors:  Craig Steinmaus; Catterina Ferreccio; Johanna Acevedo; Yan Yuan; Jane Liaw; Viviana Durán; Susana Cuevas; José García; Rodrigo Meza; Rodrigo Valdés; Gustavo Valdés; Hugo Benítez; Vania VanderLinde; Vania Villagra; Kenneth P Cantor; Lee E Moore; Saida G Perez; Scott Steinmaus; Allan H Smith
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 8.  Approaches for assessing risks to sensitive populations: lessons learned from evaluating risks in the pediatric population.

Authors:  Ronald N Hines; Dana Sargent; Herman Autrup; Linda S Birnbaum; Robert L Brent; Nancy G Doerrer; Elaine A Cohen Hubal; Daland R Juberg; Christian Laurent; Robert Luebke; Klaus Olejniczak; Christopher J Portier; William Slikker
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2009-09-21       Impact factor: 4.849

9.  Risk of solid cancer in the offspring of female workers of the Mayak nuclear facility in the Southern Urals, Russian Federation.

Authors:  Y Tsareva; I Deltour; M Sokolnikov; P Okatenko; V V Vostrotin; S J Schonfeld; J Schüz
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 1.925

10.  Intraoperative radiation exposure in spinal scoliosis surgery for pediatric patients using the O-arm® imaging system.

Authors:  Kazuyoshi Kobayashi; Kei Ando; Kenyu Ito; Mikito Tsushima; Masayoshi Morozumi; Satoshi Tanaka; Masaaki Machino; Kyotaro Ota; Naoki Ishiguro; Shiro Imagama
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2018-02-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.