| Literature DB >> 22874897 |
Abstract
Exposure to indoor radon has been determined to be the second leading cause of lung cancer after tobacco smoking. Canadian population risk of radon induced lung cancer was assessed in 2005 with the radon distribution characteristics determined from a radon survey carried out in the late 1970s in 19 cities. In that survey, a grab sampling method was used to measure radon levels. The observed radon concentration in 14,000 Canadian homes surveyed followed a log-normal distribution with a geometric mean (GM) of 11.2 Bq m(-3) and a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 3.9. Based on the information from that survey, it was estimated that ∼10 % of lung cancers in Canada resulted from indoor radon exposure. To gain a better understanding of radon concentrations in homes across the country, a national residential radon survey was launched in April 2009. In the recent survey, long-term (3 month or longer) indoor radon measurements were made in roughly 14 000 homes in 121 health regions across Canada. The observed radon concentrations follow, as expected, a log-normal distribution with a GM of 41.9 Bq m(-3) and a GSD of 2.8. Based on the more accurate radon distribution characteristics obtained from the recent cross-Canada radon survey, a re-assessment of Canadian population risk for radon induced lung cancer was undertaken. The theoretical estimates show that 16 % of lung cancer deaths among Canadians are attributable to indoor radon exposure. These results strongly suggest the ongoing need for the Canadian National Radon Program. In particular, there is a need for a focus on education and awareness by all levels of government, and in partnership with key stakeholders, to encourage Canadians to take action to reduce the risk from indoor radon exposure.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22874897 PMCID: PMC3509926 DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncs147
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry ISSN: 0144-8420 Impact factor: 0.972
Lifetime RRs at different radon exposures, the distribution of ARs for Canadian men from indoor radon exposure and estimated lung-cancer deaths attributable to radon for the year 2011.
| Radon range | Proportion of homes | Relative risk, RR( | Contribution to AR | Lung-cancer deaths in 2011 attributable to radon | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bq m–3 | (%) | Ever-smoker | Never-smoker | Ever-smoker | Never-smoker | Ever-smoker | Never-smoker |
| 0–18 | 21.12 | 1.0414 | 1.0937 | 0.0074 | 0.0138 | 79 | 8 |
| 19–37 | 24.55 | 1.0847 | 1.1924 | 0.0175 | 0.0330 | 188 | 19 |
| 38–56 | 15.88 | 1.1277 | 1.2911 | 0.0171 | 0.0322 | 184 | 18 |
| 57–74 | 9.85 | 1.1682 | 1.3844 | 0.0140 | 0.0264 | 150 | 15 |
| 75–92 | 6.76 | 1.2084 | 1.4777 | 0.0119 | 0.0225 | 128 | 13 |
| 93–111 | 5.01 | 1.2505 | 1.5760 | 0.0106 | 0.0201 | 114 | 11 |
| 112–130 | 3.60 | 1.2924 | 1.6742 | 0.0089 | 0.0169 | 95 | 9 |
| 131–148 | 2.53 | 1.3317 | 1.7672 | 0.0071 | 0.0135 | 76 | 8 |
| 149–166 | 1.93 | 1.3708 | 1.8600 | 0.0060 | 0.0116 | 65 | 6 |
| 167–185 | 1.57 | 1.4118 | 1.9580 | 0.0055 | 0.0105 | 59 | 6 |
| 186–200 | 0.99 | 1.4439 | 2.0352 | 0.0037 | 0.0072 | 40 | 4 |
| 201–250 | 2.26 | 1.5498 | 2.2921 | 0.0105 | 0.0204 | 112 | 11 |
| 251–300 | 1.30 | 1.6536 | 2.5482 | 0.0072 | 0.0141 | 77 | 8 |
| 301–400 | 1.32 | 1.8555 | 3.0583 | 0.0095 | 0.0190 | 102 | 11 |
| 401–500 | 0.59 | 2.0500 | 3.5655 | 0.0052 | 0.0106 | 56 | 6 |
| 501–600 | 0.30 | 2.2373 | 4.0696 | 0.0031 | 0.0064 | 33 | 4 |
| 601–800 | 0.26 | 2.5916 | 5.0692 | 0.0035 | 0.0074 | 37 | 4 |
| >800 | 0.25 | 2.9206 | 6.0573 | 0.0041 | 0.0089 | 44 | 5 |
| Total | 100.00 | — | — | 0.1527 | 0.2945 | 1639 | 166 |
The same radon ranges are used here as in the previous assessment(.
A radon concentration range of 0–18 in Bq m–3 corresponds to 0–0.5 in pCi l–1.
Lifetime RRs at different radon exposures, the distribution of ARs for Canadian women from indoor radon exposure and estimated lung-cancer deaths attributable to radon for the year 2011.
| Radon range | Proportion of homes | Relative risk, RR( | Contribution to AR | Lung-cancer deaths in 2011 attributable to radon | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bq m–3 | (%) | Ever-smoker | Never-smoker | Ever-smoker | Never-smoker | Ever-smoker | Never-smoker |
| 0–18 | 21.12 | 1.0382 | 1.0862 | 0.0069 | 0.0130 | 58 | 12 |
| 19–37 | 24.55 | 1.0782 | 1.1770 | 0.0164 | 0.0311 | 137 | 29 |
| 38–56 | 15.88 | 1.1180 | 1.2677 | 0.0160 | 0.0304 | 134 | 28 |
| 57–74 | 9.85 | 1.1554 | 1.3536 | 0.0131 | 0.0249 | 109 | 23 |
| 75–92 | 6.76 | 1.1926 | 1.4394 | 0.0111 | 0.0212 | 93 | 20 |
| 93–111 | 5.01 | 1.2317 | 1.5298 | 0.0099 | 0.0190 | 83 | 18 |
| 112–130 | 3.60 | 1.2705 | 1.6201 | 0.0083 | 0.0159 | 69 | 15 |
| 131–148 | 2.53 | 1.3070 | 1.7056 | 0.0066 | 0.0128 | 55 | 12 |
| 149–166 | 1.93 | 1.3433 | 1.7910 | 0.0057 | 0.0109 | 47 | 10 |
| 167–185 | 1.57 | 1.3814 | 1.8811 | 0.0051 | 0.0099 | 43 | 9 |
| 186–200 | 0.99 | 1.4113 | 1.9521 | 0.0035 | 0.0067 | 29 | 6 |
| 201–250 | 2.26 | 1.5099 | 2.1883 | 0.0098 | 0.0192 | 82 | 18 |
| 251–300 | 1.30 | 1.6069 | 2.4239 | 0.0068 | 0.0133 | 57 | 12 |
| 301–400 | 1.32 | 1.7961 | 2.8928 | 0.0090 | 0.0179 | 75 | 17 |
| 401–500 | 0.59 | 1.9790 | 3.3590 | 0.0049 | 0.0100 | 41 | 9 |
| 501–600 | 0.30 | 2.1561 | 3.8224 | 0.0029 | 0.0060 | 25 | 6 |
| 601–800 | 0.26 | 2.4930 | 4.7409 | 0.0033 | 0.0069 | 28 | 6 |
| >800 | 0.25 | 2.8084 | 5.6486 | 0.0039 | 0.0084 | 33 | 8 |
| Total | 100.00 | — | — | 0.1431 | 0.2776 | 1198 | 258 |
Estimated lung cancer deaths that could have been prevented in 2011 if all the homes with radon concentrations above given levels had taken effective remedical actions to outdoor levels.
| Radon level Bq m–3 | Lung cancer deaths prevented | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | Total | |
| 100 | 941 | 763 | 1704 |
| 200 | 510 | 417 | 927 |
| 400 | 189 | 156 | 345 |
| 600 | 90 | 75 | 165 |
| 800 | 49 | 41 | 90 |
Figure 1.Distributions of radon concentrations in Canadian homes obtained from the previous cross-Canada radon survey( and the current radon survey(.