Literature DB >> 18481074

Modeling of cell inactivation and carcinogenesis in the atomic bomb survivors with applications to the mortality from all solid, stomach and liver cancer.

Peter Jacob1, Linda Walsh, Markus Eidemüller.   

Abstract

The two-stage clonal expansion (TSCE) model of carcinogenesis has been applied to cancer mortality data from the atomic bomb survivors, to examine the possible influence of radiation-induced cell inactivation on excess relative risk (ERR) and excess absolute risk (EAR) estimates. Cell survival curve forms being either conventional or allowing for low-dose hypersensitivity (LDH) were investigated. Quality-of-fit tests for non-nested models were used in comparisons with the types of empirical risk models applied at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) in Hiroshima. In general the TSCE model was found to represent the data more economically (i.e., with fewer parameters for a similarly good description of the data) than the empirical risk model. However, the data are not strong enough to give a clear preference to one of the very different model types used. Central ERR and EAR estimates (at 1 Sv, for age at exposure 30 and age attained 70) from TSCE and empirical models were in good agreement with each other and with previously published estimates. However, the TSCE models including radiation-induced cell inactivation resulted in a lower estimate of the relative risk at young ages at exposure (0-15 years) than the empirical model. Also the TSCE model allowing for radiation-induced cell inactivation with a conventional cell survival curve resulted at 0.2 Sv in significantly lower risk estimates than the model with LDH. These model differences have been used here to suggest risk estimates which include model uncertainty as well as the usual statistical uncertainty. Model uncertainties were small for central estimates and larger for other values of the variables. Applying the proposed method to excess risk for all solid cancer at 1 Sv, age at exposure 10 and age attained 70, results in total uncertainty ranges that are wider than the pure statistical uncertainty range by about 30% for both ERR and EAR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18481074     DOI: 10.1007/s00411-008-0169-9

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


  24 in total

1.  Survival of a mixture of cells of variable linear-quadratic sensitivity to radiation.

Authors:  R B Hawkins
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.841

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.  Is low-dose hyper-radiosensitivity a measure of G2-phase cell radiosensitivity?

Authors:  B Marples
Journal:  Cancer Metastasis Rev       Date:  2004 Aug-Dec       Impact factor: 9.264

4.  Comparative study on radiosensitivity of various tumor cells and human normal liver cells.

Authors:  Jian-She Yang; Wen-Jian Li; Guang-Ming Zhou; Xiao-Dong Jin; Jing-Guang Xia; Ju-Fang Wang; Zhuan-Zi Wang; Chuan-Ling Guo; Qing-Xiang Gao
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  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

6.  Low-dose hypersensitivity and increased radioresistance in a panel of human tumor cell lines with different radiosensitivity.

Authors:  B G Wouters; A M Sy; L D Skarsgard
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  The exact formula for tumor incidence in the two-stage model.

Authors:  A Kopp-Schneider; C J Portier; C D Sherman
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 4.000

8.  Effect of recent changes in atomic bomb survivor dosimetry on cancer mortality risk estimates.

Authors:  Dale L Preston; Donald A Pierce; Yukiko Shimizu; Harry M Cullings; Shoichiro Fujita; Sachiyo Funamoto; Kazunori Kodama
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 9.  Review article: what have we learnt from gastric biopsy?

Authors:  M Rugge; V M Russo; M Guido
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 8.171

10.  On the exact hazard and survival functions of the MVK stochastic carcinogenesis model.

Authors:  Q Zheng
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 4.000

View more
  4 in total

1.  Breast cancer risk in atomic bomb survivors from multi-model inference with incidence data 1958-1998.

Authors:  J C Kaiser; P Jacob; R Meckbach; H M Cullings
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 1.925

2.  Comparison of mortality and incidence solid cancer risk after radiation exposure in the Techa River Cohort.

Authors:  M Eidemüller; E Ostroumova; L Krestinina; S Epiphanova; A Akleyev; P Jacob
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  Lung cancer risk of Mayak workers: modelling of carcinogenesis and bystander effect.

Authors:  P Jacob; R Meckbach; M Sokolnikov; V V Khokhryakov; E Vasilenko
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2007-06-12       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  Hyper-radiosensitivity affects low-dose acute myeloid leukemia incidence in a mathematical model.

Authors:  Sjors Stouten; Ben Balkenende; Lars Roobol; Sjoerd Verduyn Lunel; Christophe Badie; Fieke Dekkers
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 2.017

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.