Literature DB >> 24366315

Cancer risk at low doses of ionizing radiation: artificial neural networks inference from atomic bomb survivors.

Masao S Sasaki1, Akira Tachibana, Shunichi Takeda.   

Abstract

Cancer risk at low doses of ionizing radiation remains poorly defined because of ambiguity in the quantitative link to doses below 0.2 Sv in atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki arising from limitations in the statistical power and information available on overall radiation dose. To deal with these difficulties, a novel nonparametric statistics based on the 'integrate-and-fire' algorithm of artificial neural networks was developed and tested in cancer databases established by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation. The analysis revealed unique features at low doses that could not be accounted for by nominal exposure dose, including (i) the presence of a threshold that varied with organ, gender and age at exposure, and (ii) a small but significant bumping increase in cancer risk at low doses in Nagasaki that probably reflects internal exposure to (239)Pu. The threshold was distinct from the canonical definition of zero effect in that it was manifested as negative excess relative risk, or suppression of background cancer rates. Such a unique tissue response at low doses of radiation exposure has been implicated in the context of the molecular basis of radiation-environment interplay in favor of recently emerging experimental evidence on DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice and its epigenetic memory by histone marking.

Entities:  

Keywords:  A-bomb survivors; DSB repair pathway choice; artificial neural networks; cancer risk; integrate-and-fire model; low-dose radiation

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24366315      PMCID: PMC4014156          DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrt133

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Radiat Res        ISSN: 0449-3060            Impact factor:   2.724


  136 in total

1.  The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

Review 2.  Assessing cancer risks of low-dose radiation.

Authors:  Leon Mullenders; Mike Atkinson; Herwig Paretzke; Laure Sabatier; Simon Bouffler
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 60.716

3.  Relative and absolute risks of cigarette smoking on major histologic types of lung cancer in Korean men.

Authors:  Young Ho Yun; Min Kyung Lim; Kyu Won Jung; Jong-Myon Bae; Sang Min Park; Soon Ae Shin; Jin Soo Lee; Jae-Gahb Park
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Multiple pathways for repair of DNA double-strand breaks in mammalian chromosomes.

Authors:  Y Lin; T Lukacsovich; A S Waldman
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.272

5.  Inhibition of homologous recombination by DNA-dependent protein kinase requires kinase activity, is titratable, and is modulated by autophosphorylation.

Authors:  Jessica A Neal; Van Dang; Pauline Douglas; Marc S Wold; Susan P Lees-Miller; Katheryn Meek
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2011-02-07       Impact factor: 4.272

6.  Overexpression of Rad51 inhibits double-strand break-induced homologous recombination but does not affect gene conversion tract lengths.

Authors:  Kimberly S Paffett; Jennifer A Clikeman; Sean Palmer; Jac A Nickoloff
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2005-06-08

7.  DNA damage response pathway in radioadaptive response.

Authors:  Masao S Sasaki; Yosuke Ejima; Akira Tachibana; Toshiko Yamada; Kanji Ishizaki; Takashi Shimizu; Taisei Nomura
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2002-07-25       Impact factor: 2.433

8.  Existence of a threshold-like dose for gamma-ray induction of thymic lymphomas and no susceptibility to radiation-induced solid tumors in SCID mice.

Authors:  Hiroko Ishii-Ohba; Shigeru Kobayashi; Mayumi Nishimura; Yoshiya Shimada; Hideo Tsuji; Toshihiko Sado; Toshiaki Ogiu
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2007-03-04       Impact factor: 2.433

9.  Dose response of gamma rays and iron nuclei for induction of chromosomal aberrations in normal and repair-deficient cell lines.

Authors:  Kerry A George; Megumi Hada; Lori J Jackson; Todd Elliott; Tetsuya Kawata; Janice M Pluth; Francis A Cucinotta
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.841

10.  Differential effects of low- and high-dose X-rays on N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea-induced mutagenesis in thymocytes of B6C3F1 gpt-delta mice.

Authors:  Kazumi Yamauchi; Shizuko Kakinuma; Satomi Sudo; Seiji Kito; Yuki Ohta; Takehiko Nohmi; Ken-Ichi Masumura; Mayumi Nishimura; Yoshiya Shimada
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2007-12-15       Impact factor: 2.433

View more
  16 in total

1.  Point/Counterpoint: low-dose radiation is beneficial, not harmful.

Authors:  Mohan Doss; Mark P Little; Colin G Orton
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Radiation doses from radiological imaging do not increase the risk of cancer.

Authors:  M Doss
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Epidemiology Without Biology: False Paradigms, Unfounded Assumptions, and Specious Statistics in Radiation Science (with Commentaries by Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake and Christopher Busby and a Reply by the Authors).

Authors:  Bill Sacks; Gregory Meyerson; Jeffry A Siegel
Journal:  Biol Theory       Date:  2016-06-17

4.  Ionizing radiation exposure: hazards, prevention, and biomarker screening.

Authors:  Hongxiang Mu; Jing Sun; Linwei Li; Jie Yin; Nan Hu; Weichao Zhao; Dexin Ding; Lan Yi
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2018-04-29       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 5.  Radiobiology in Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Pat Zanzonico; Lawrence Dauer; H William Strauss
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2016-12

6.  Remedy for radiation fear - discard the politicized science.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 7.  Donor-specific cell-based assays in studying sensitivity to low-dose radiation: a population-based perspective.

Authors:  Dora Il'yasova; Alexander Kinev; C David Melton; Faith G Davis
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2014-11-18

8.  A message to Fukushima: nothing to fear but fear itself.

Authors:  Shizuyo Sutou
Journal:  Genes Environ       Date:  2016-06-01

9.  Low dose radiation risks for women surviving the a-bombs in Japan: generalized additive model.

Authors:  Greg Dropkin
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 5.984

10.  Atomic Bomb Survivors Life-Span Study: Insufficient Statistical Power to Select Radiation Carcinogenesis Model.

Authors:  Yehoshua Socol; Ludwik Dobrzyński
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 2.658

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.