Literature DB >> 23803503

Uncertainties in estimating health risks associated with exposure to ionising radiation.

R Julian Preston1, John D Boice, A Bertrand Brill, Ranajit Chakraborty, Rory Conolly, F Owen Hoffman, Richard W Hornung, David C Kocher, Charles E Land, Roy E Shore, Gayle E Woloschak.   

Abstract

The information for the present discussion on the uncertainties associated with estimation of radiation risks and probability of disease causation was assembled for the recently published NCRP Report No. 171 on this topic. This memorandum provides a timely overview of the topic, given that quantitative uncertainty analysis is the state of the art in health risk assessment and given its potential importance to developments in radiation protection. Over the past decade the increasing volume of epidemiology data and the supporting radiobiology findings have aided in the reduction of uncertainty in the risk estimates derived. However, it is equally apparent that there remain significant uncertainties related to dose assessment, low dose and low dose-rate extrapolation approaches (e.g. the selection of an appropriate dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor), the biological effectiveness where considerations of the health effects of high-LET and lower-energy low-LET radiations are required and the transfer of risks from a population for which health effects data are available to one for which such data are not available. The impact of radiation on human health has focused in recent years on cancer, although there has been a decided increase in the data for noncancer effects together with more reliable estimates of the risk following radiation exposure, even at relatively low doses (notably for cataracts and cardiovascular disease). New approaches for the estimation of hereditary risk have been developed with the use of human data whenever feasible, although the current estimates of heritable radiation effects still are based on mouse data because of an absence of effects in human studies. Uncertainties associated with estimation of these different types of health effects are discussed in a qualitative and semi-quantitative manner as appropriate. The way forward would seem to require additional epidemiological studies, especially studies of low dose and low dose-rate occupational and perhaps environmental exposures and for exposures to x rays and high-LET radiations used in medicine. The development of models for more reliably combining the epidemiology data with experimental laboratory animal and cellular data can enhance the overall risk assessment approach by providing biologically refined data to strengthen the estimation of effects at low doses as opposed to the sole use of mathematical models of epidemiological data that are primarily driven by medium/high doses. NASA's approach to radiation protection for astronauts, although a unique occupational group, indicates the possible applicability of estimates of risk and their uncertainty in a broader context for developing recommendations on: (1) dose limits for occupational exposure and exposure of members of the public; (2) criteria to limit exposures of workers and members of the public to radon and its short-lived decay products; and (3) the dosimetric quantity (effective dose) used in radiation protection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23803503     DOI: 10.1088/0952-4746/33/3/573

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Radiol Prot        ISSN: 0952-4746            Impact factor:   1.394


  16 in total

Review 1.  Potential effects of environmental chemical contamination in congenital heart disease.

Authors:  Francesca Gorini; Enrico Chiappa; Luna Gargani; Eugenio Picano
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 1.655

2.  Simulation-extrapolation method to address errors in atomic bomb survivor dosimetry on solid cancer and leukaemia mortality risk estimates, 1950-2003.

Authors:  Rodrigue S Allodji; Boris Schwartz; Ibrahima Diallo; Césaire Agbovon; Dominique Laurier; Florent de Vathaire
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  Leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma mortality (1950-1999) and incidence (1969-1999) in the Eldorado uranium workers cohort.

Authors:  Lydia B Zablotska; Rachel S D Lane; Stanley E Frost; Patsy A Thompson
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 6.498

4.  Targeted overexpression of mitochondrial catalase prevents radiation-induced cognitive dysfunction.

Authors:  Vipan K Parihar; Barrett D Allen; Katherine K Tran; Nicole N Chmielewski; Brianna M Craver; Vahan Martirosian; Josh M Morganti; Susanna Rosi; Roman Vlkolinsky; Munjal M Acharya; Gregory A Nelson; Antiño R Allen; Charles L Limoli
Journal:  Antioxid Redox Signal       Date:  2015-01-01       Impact factor: 8.401

5.  Estimation of effective doses in pediatric X-ray computed tomography examination.

Authors:  Hideki Obara; Midori Takahashi; Kazuya Kudou; Yasushi Mariya; Yoshihiro Takai; Ikuo Kashiwakura
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 2.447

6.  The communication of the radiation risk from CT in relation to its clinical benefit in the era of personalized medicine: part 1: the radiation risk from CT.

Authors:  Sjirk J Westra
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-10-11

7.  The communication of the radiation risk from CT in relation to its clinical benefit in the era of personalized medicine: part 2: benefits versus risk of CT.

Authors:  Sjirk J Westra
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-10-11

8.  Assessment of Residual Radioactivity by a Comprehensive Wireless, Wearable Device in Thyroid Cancer Patients Undergoing Radionuclide Therapy and Comparison With the Results of a Home Device: A Feasibility Study.

Authors:  R Gallicchio; D Scapicchio; A Nardelli; T Pellegrino; M Prisco; P Mainenti; C Sirignano; P Pedicini; G Storto
Journal:  IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 3.316

9.  Are the studies on cancer risk from CT scans biased by indication? Elements of answer from a large-scale cohort study in France.

Authors:  N Journy; J-L Rehel; H Ducou Le Pointe; C Lee; H Brisse; J-F Chateil; S Caer-Lorho; D Laurier; M-O Bernier
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Non-cancer morbidity among Estonian Chernobyl cleanup workers: a register-based cohort study.

Authors:  Kaja Rahu; Evelyn J Bromet; Timo Hakulinen; Anssi Auvinen; Anneli Uusküla; Mati Rahu
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.