Igor Shuryak1, Rainer K Sachs, David J Brenner. 1. Center for Radiological Research, Department of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data show that radiation exposure during childhood is associated with larger cancer risks compared with exposure at older ages. For exposures in adulthood, however, the relative risks of radiation-induced cancer in Japanese atomic bomb survivors generally do not decrease monotonically with increasing age of adult exposure. These observations are inconsistent with most standard models of radiation-induced cancer, which predict that relative risks decrease monotonically with increasing age at exposure, at all ages. METHODS: We analyzed observed cancer risk patterns as a function of age at exposure in Japanese atomic bomb survivors by using a biologically based quantitative model of radiation carcinogenesis that incorporates both radiation induction of premalignant cells (initiation) and radiation-induced promotion of premalignant damage. This approach emphasizes the kinetics of radiation-induced initiation and promotion, and tracks the yields of premalignant cells before, during, shortly after, and long after radiation exposure. RESULTS: Radiation risks after exposure in younger individuals are dominated by initiation processes, whereas radiation risks after exposure at later ages are more influenced by promotion of preexisting premalignant cells. Thus, the cancer site-dependent balance between initiation and promotion determines the dependence of cancer risk on age at radiation exposure. For example, in terms of radiation induction of premalignant cells, a quantitative measure of the relative contribution of initiation vs promotion is 10-fold larger for breast cancer than for lung cancer. Reflecting this difference, radiation-induced breast cancer risks decrease with age at exposure at all ages, whereas radiation-induced lung cancer risks do not. CONCLUSION: For radiation exposure in middle age, most radiation-induced cancer risks do not, as often assumed, decrease with increasing age at exposure. This observation suggests that promotional processes in radiation carcinogenesis become increasingly important as the age at exposure increases. Radiation-induced cancer risks after exposure in middle age may be up to twice as high as previously estimated, which could have implications for occupational exposure and radiological imaging.
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data show that radiation exposure during childhood is associated with larger cancer risks compared with exposure at older ages. For exposures in adulthood, however, the relative risks of radiation-induced cancer in Japanese atomic bomb survivors generally do not decrease monotonically with increasing age of adult exposure. These observations are inconsistent with most standard models of radiation-induced cancer, which predict that relative risks decrease monotonically with increasing age at exposure, at all ages. METHODS: We analyzed observed cancer risk patterns as a function of age at exposure in Japanese atomic bomb survivors by using a biologically based quantitative model of radiation carcinogenesis that incorporates both radiation induction of premalignant cells (initiation) and radiation-induced promotion of premalignant damage. This approach emphasizes the kinetics of radiation-induced initiation and promotion, and tracks the yields of premalignant cells before, during, shortly after, and long after radiation exposure. RESULTS: Radiation risks after exposure in younger individuals are dominated by initiation processes, whereas radiation risks after exposure at later ages are more influenced by promotion of preexisting premalignant cells. Thus, the cancer site-dependent balance between initiation and promotion determines the dependence of cancer risk on age at radiation exposure. For example, in terms of radiation induction of premalignant cells, a quantitative measure of the relative contribution of initiation vs promotion is 10-fold larger for breast cancer than for lung cancer. Reflecting this difference, radiation-induced breast cancer risks decrease with age at exposure at all ages, whereas radiation-induced lung cancer risks do not. CONCLUSION: For radiation exposure in middle age, most radiation-induced cancer risks do not, as often assumed, decrease with increasing age at exposure. This observation suggests that promotional processes in radiation carcinogenesis become increasingly important as the age at exposure increases. Radiation-induced cancer risks after exposure in middle age may be up to twice as high as previously estimated, which could have implications for occupational exposure and radiological imaging.
Authors: Igor Shuryak; Philip Hahnfeldt; Lynn Hlatky; Rainer K Sachs; David J Brenner Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Date: 2009-06-05 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: David S Gierada; Kavita Garg; Hrudaya Nath; Diane C Strollo; Richard M Fagerstrom; Melissa B Ford Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Jonathan D Eisenberg; Michael E Gilmore; Mannudeep K Kalra; Chung Yin Kong; Pari V Pandharipande Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Pierre-Alexandre Poletti; Minerva Becker; Christoph D Becker; Alice Halfon Poletti; Olivier T Rutschmann; Habib Zaidi; Thomas Perneger; Alexandra Platon Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michael T Munley; Joseph E Moore; Matthew C Walb; Scott P Isom; John D Olson; J Gregory Zora; Nancy D Kock; Kenneth T Wheeler; Mark Steven Miller Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2011-09-30 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Claudia Frellesen; Wenzel Stock; J Matthias Kerl; Thomas Lehnert; Julian L Wichmann; Christoph Nau; Emanuel Geiger; Sebastian Wutzler; Martin Beeres; Boris Schulz; Boris Bodelle; Hanns Ackermann; Thomas J Vogl; Ralf W Bauer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Lindsey C Wu; Ruth A Kleinerman; Rochelle E Curtis; Sharon A Savage; Amy Berrington de González Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-09-10 Impact factor: 4.254