ProZES: the methodology and software tool for assessment of assigned share of radiation in probability of cancer occurrence

Lifetime Risks for Lung Cancer due to Occupational Radon Exposure: A Systematic Analysis of Estimation Components

Lifetime risk estimates play a key role in many areas of radiation research. Here, the focus is on the lifetime excess absolute risk (LEAR) for dying from lung cancer due to occupational radon exposure based on uranium miners cohort studies. The major components in estimating LEAR were systematically varied to investigate the variability and uncertainties of results. Major components of the LEAR calculation are baseline mortality rates for lung cancer and all causes of death, risk model and exposure scenario. Sex-averaged mortality rates were chosen from a mixed Euro-American-Asian population, in addition to mortality rates to represent heavy and light smokers. Seven radon-related lung cancer risk models derived from different uranium miners cohorts were compared. As exposure scenarios, occupational exposure of two working level months (WLM) from age 18-64 years was considered, and three scenarios from the German uranium miners cohort. Further components were modified in sensitivity analyses. The LEAR was compared to other lifetime risk measures. With a range from less than 0.6 × 10-4 to over 8.0 × 10-4, LEAR per WLM estimates were influenced heavily by the choice of risk models. Notably, mortality rates, particularly lung cancer mortality rates, had a strong impact on LEAR per WLM across all models. The LEAR per WLM exhibited only low variation to changes in exposure scenarios for all risk models, except for the BEIR VI model fitted on the pooled 11 miners study. All assessed lifetime risk measures displayed a monotonically increasing relationship between exposure and lifetime risk at low to moderate exposures, with minor differences between ELR, REID, and LEAR (all per WLM). RADS yields the largest lifetime risk estimates in most situations. There is substantial variation in LEAR per WLM estimates depending on the choice of underlying calculation components. Reference populations and mortality rates should be selected with care depending on the application of lifetime risk calculations. The explicit choice of the lifetime risk measure was found to be negligible. These findings should be taken into consideration when using lifetime risk measures for radiation protection policy purposes.

A no-fault risk compensation approach for radiation risks incurred in space travel

In this paper we recommend an appropriate compensation approach should be established for fatality and disabilities that may occur due to space radiation exposures of government or industry workers. A brief review of compensation approaches for nuclear energy and nuclear weapons development workers in the United States and other countries is described. We then summarize issues in the application of probability of causation calculation and provide examples of probability of causation (PC) calculations for missions to the International Space Station and Earth's moon or for Mars exploration. The main focus of this paper follows with a recommendation of a no-fault approach to compensation with the creation of appropriate insurance policies funded by employers to cover all disabilities or fatality, without requiring proof of causation or restriction to conditions that imply causation. Importantly we propose that the compensation described should be managed by recourse to private insurers.

Minimum latency effects for cancer associated with exposures to radiation or other carcinogens

BACKGROUND

In estimating radiation-associated cancer risks a fixed period for the minimum latency is often assumed. Two empirical latency functions have been used to model latency, continuously increasing from 0. A stochastic biologically-based approach yields a still more plausible way of describing latency and can be directly estimated from clinical data.

METHODS

We derived the parameters for a stochastic biologically-based model from tumour growth data for various cancers, and least-squares fitted the two types of empirical latency function to the stochastic model-predicted cumulative probability.

RESULTS

There is wide variation in growth rates among tumours, particularly slow for prostate and thyroid cancer and particularly fast for leukaemia. The slow growth rate for prostate and thyroid tumours implies that the number of tumour cells required for clinical detection cannot greatly exceed 106. For all tumours, both empirical latency functions closely approximated the predicted biological model cumulative probability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results, illustrating use of a stochastic biologically-based model using clinical data not tied to any particular carcinogen, have implications for estimating latency associated with any mutagen. They apply to tumour growth in general, and may be useful for example, in planning screenings for cancer using imaging techniques.

Time-integrated radiation risk metrics and interpopulation variability of survival

Task Group 115 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection is focusing on mission-related exposures to space radiation and concomitant health risks for space crew members including, among others, risk of cancer development. Uncertainties in cumulative radiation risk estimates come from the stochastic nature of the considered health outcome (i.e., cancer), uncertainties of statistical inference and model parameters, unknown secular trends used for projections of population statistics and unknown variability of survival properties between individuals or population groups. The variability of survival is usually ignored when dealing with large groups, which can be assumed well represented by the statistical data for the contemporary general population, either in a specific country or world averaged. Space crew members differ in many aspects from individuals represented by the general population, including, for example, their lifestyle and health status, nutrition, medical care, training and education. The individuality of response to radiation and lifespan is explored in this modelling study. Task Group 115 is currently evaluating applicability and robustness of various risk metrics for quantification of radiation-attributed risks of cancer for space crew members. This paper demonstrates the impact of interpopulation variability of survival curves on values and uncertainty of the estimates of the time-integrated radiation risk of cancer.

Concepts of association between cancer and ionising radiation: accounting for specific biological mechanisms

The probability that an observed cancer was caused by radiation exposure is usually estimated using cancer rates and risk models from radioepidemiological cohorts and is called assigned share (AS). This definition implicitly assumes that an ongoing carcinogenic process is unaffected by the studied radiation exposure. However, there is strong evidence that radiation can also accelerate an existing clonal development towards cancer. In this work, we define different association measures that an observed cancer was newly induced, accelerated, or retarded. The measures were quantified exemplarily by Monte Carlo simulations that track the development of individual cells. Three biologically based two-stage clonal expansion (TSCE) models were applied. In the first model, radiation initiates cancer development, while in the other two, radiation has a promoting effect, i.e. radiation accelerates the clonal expansion of pre-cancerous cells. The parameters of the TSCE models were derived from breast cancer data from the atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For exposure at age 30, all three models resulted in similar estimates of AS at age 60. For the initiation model, estimates of association were nearly identical to AS. However, for the promotion models, the cancerous clonal development was frequently accelerated towards younger ages, resulting in associations substantially higher than AS. This work shows that the association between a given cancer and exposure in an affected person depends on the underlying biological mechanism and can be substantially larger than the AS derived from classic radioepidemiology.

Summary of Radiation Research Society Online 67th Annual Meeting, Symposium on "Radiation and Circulatory Effects"

PURPOSE

This article summarizes a number of presentations from a session on "Radiation and Circulatory Effects" held during the Radiation Research Society Online 67^th Annual Meeting, October 3-6 2021.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Different epidemiological cohorts were analyzed with various statistical means common in epidemiology. The cohorts included the one from the U.S. Million Person Study and the Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study. In addition, one of the contributions in our article relies on results from analyses of the Japanese atomic bomb survivors, Russian emergency and recovery workers and cohorts of nuclear workers. The Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study data were analyzed with a larger series of linear and nonlinear dose-response models in addition to the linear no-threshold (LNT) model.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The talks in this symposium showed that low/moderate acute doses at low/moderate dose rates can be associated with an increased risk of CVD, although some of the epidemiological results for occupational cohorts are equivocal. The usually only limited availability of information on well-known risk factors for circulatory disease (e.g. smoking, obesity, hypertension, diabetes, physical activity) is an important limiting factor that may bias any observed association between radiation exposure and detrimental health outcome, especially at low doses. Additional follow-up and careful dosimetric and outcome assessment are necessary and more epidemiological and experimental research is required. Obtaining reliable information on other risk factors is especially important.

Valid versus invalid radiation cancer risk assessment methods illustrated using Swiss population data

After the nuclear accident in Fukushima, the public interest in radiation related cancer-risk assessment increased. However, interpretations of results from epidemiological studies and comprehension of cancer risk assessment methods can be unclear and involve questions about correctness and validity of the approaches. To shed some light on this potential lack of clarity, valid versus invalid radiation cancer risk assessments methods are illustrated here using Swiss population data. This involves a comparison of the cancer risk assessment method based on collective dose and the cumulative risk assessment method, where the latter is recommended with regard to uncertainties and risk of misinterpretation. Further, risk assessment in different dose ranges is discussed and it is concluded that below 100 mSv it cannot be appropriately stated that an adequate strength of evidence of a causal relationship between cancer and radiation is provided, because of the large uncertainties in this dose range. However, the linear non-threshold (LNT) model can be used to model the dose response, because it represents a prudent and parsimonious model, that fits the data well and lies within the given uncertainties. Additionally, treatments of uncertainties in the risk models are illustrated. The EU-project CONFIDENCE software is applied here to obtain example radiation related lifetime cancer risks for exposures of 20 mSv and 5 mSv. Furthermore, the impact of different dosimetry errors on the uncertainties in the cancer lifetime risk calculation is analysed, by including different standard deviations (SD) and by comparing the sampling of the doses from a normal and a lognormal distribution. Using the normal distribution, for females exposed to 20 mSv, the 95% confidence interval (CI) on the cancer lifetime risk increases, when compared to using a SD of 4 mSv, by a factor of 1.5 using a SD of 8 mSv and by a factor of 1.7 using a SD of 10 mSv. The corresponding factors for males for the same exposure are 1.3 and 1.5 respectively. For exposure to 5 mSv, the 95% CIs on the risk increase by a factor of 1.2 for females and 1.4 for men for a SD of 2 mSv using the normal distribution compared to the lognormal distribution and by a factor of 1.5 and 1.8 for a SD of 3 mSv compared to a SD of 1 mSv respectively. Furthermore, differences in the resulting 95% CI on the risk, using different distributions for the dose sampling are visible.

Estimating long-term health risks after breast cancer radiotherapy: merging evidence from low and high doses

In breast cancer radiotherapy, substantial radiation exposure of organs other than the treated breast cannot be avoided, potentially inducing second primary cancer or heart disease. While distant organs and large parts of nearby ones receive doses in the mGy-Gy range, small parts of the heart, lung and bone marrow often receive doses as high as 50 Gy. Contemporary treatment planning allows for considerable flexibility in the distribution of this exposure. To optimise treatment with regards to long-term health risks, evidence-based risk estimates are required for the entire broad range of exposures. Here, we thus propose an approach that combines data from medical and epidemiological studies with different exposure conditions. Approximating cancer induction as a local process, we estimate organ cancer risks by integrating organ-specific dose-response relationships over the organ dose distributions. For highly exposed organ parts, specific high-dose risk models based on studies with medical exposure are applied. For organs or their parts receiving relatively low doses, established dose-response models based on radiation-epidemiological data are used. Joining the models in the intermediate dose range leads to a combined, in general non-linear, dose response supported by data over the whole relevant dose range. For heart diseases, a linear model consistent with high- and low-dose studies is presented. The resulting estimates of long-term health risks are largely compatible with rate ratios observed in randomised breast cancer radiotherapy trials. The risk models have been implemented in a software tool PASSOS that estimates long-term risks for individual breast cancer patients.

A bespoke health risk assessment methodology for the radiation protection of astronauts

An alternative approach that is particularly suitable for the radiation health risk assessment (HRA) of astronauts is presented. The quantity, Radiation Attributed Decrease of Survival (RADS), representing the cumulative decrease in the unknown survival curve at a certain attained age, due to the radiation exposure at an earlier age, forms the basis for this alternative approach. Results are provided for all solid cancer plus leukemia incidence RADS from estimated doses from theoretical radiation exposures accumulated during long-term missions to the Moon or Mars. For example, it is shown that a 1000-day Mars exploration mission with a hypothetical mission effective dose of 1.07 Sv at typical astronaut ages around 40 years old, will result in the probability of surviving free of all types of solid cancer and leukemia until retirement age (65 years) being reduced by 4.2% (95% CI 3.2; 5.3) for males and 5.8% (95% CI 4.8; 7.0) for females. RADS dose-responses are given, for the outcomes for incidence of all solid cancer, leukemia, lung and female breast cancer. Results showing how RADS varies with age at exposure, attained age and other factors are also presented. The advantages of this alternative approach, over currently applied methodologies for the long-term radiation protection of astronauts after mission exposures, are presented with example calculations applicable to European astronaut occupational HRA. Some tentative suggestions for new types of occupational risk limits for space missions are given while acknowledging that the setting of astronaut radiation-related risk limits will ultimately be decided by the Space Agencies. Suggestions are provided for further work which builds on and extends this new HRA approach, e.g., by eventually including non-cancer effects and detailed space dosimetry.

Cancer incidence risks above and below 1 Gy for radiation protection in space

The risk assessment quantities called lifetime attributable risk (LAR) and risk of exposure-induced cancer (REIC) are used to calculate the cumulative cancer incidence risks for astronauts, attributable to radiation exposure accumulated during long term lunar and Mars missions. These risk quantities are based on the most recently published epidemiological data on the Life Span Study (LSS) of Japanese A-bomb survivors, who were exposed to γ-rays and neutrons. In order to analyze the impact of a different neutron RBE on the risk quantities, a model for the neutron relative biological effectiveness (RBE) relative to gammas in the LSS is developed based on an older dataset with less follow-up time. Since both risk quantities are based on uncertain quantities, such as survival curves, and REIC includes deterministic radiation induced non-cancer mortality risks, modelled with data based on the general population, the risks for astronauts may not be optimally estimated. The suitability of these risk assessment measures for the use of cancer risk calculation for astronauts is discussed. The work presented here shows that the use of a higher neutron RBE than the value of 10, traditionally used in the LSS risk models, can reduce the risks up to almost 50%. Additionally, including an excess absolute risk (EAR) baseline scaling also increases the risks by between 0.4% and 8.1% for the space missions considered in this study. Using just an EAR model instead of an equally weighted EAR and excess relative risk (ERR) model can decrease the cumulative risks for the considered missions by between 0.4% and 4.1% if no EAR baseline scaling is applied. If EAR baseline scaling is included, the calculated risks with the EAR- and the mixed model, as well as the risks calculated with just the ERR model are almost identical and only small differences in the uncertainties are visible.

ProZES: the methodology and software tool for assessment of assigned share of radiation in probability of cancer occurrence

ProZES is a software tool for estimating the probability that a given cancer was caused by preceding exposure to ionising radiation. ProZES calculates this probability, the assigned share, for solid cancers and hematopoietic malignant diseases, in cases of exposures to low-LET radiation, and for lung cancer in cases of exposure to radon. User-specified inputs include birth year, sex, type of diagnosed cancer, age at diagnosis, radiation exposure history and characteristics, and smoking behaviour for lung cancer. Cancer risk models are an essential part of ProZES. Linking disease and exposure to radiation involves several methodological aspects, and assessment of uncertainties received particular attention. ProZES systematically uses the principle of multi-model inference. Models of radiation risk were either newly developed or critically re-evaluated for ProZES, including dedicated models for frequent types of cancer and, for less common diseases, models for groups of functionally similar cancer sites. The low-LET models originate mostly from the study of atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Risks predicted by these models are adjusted to be applicable to the population of Germany and to different time periods. Adjustment factors for low dose rates and for a reduced risk during the minimum latency time between exposure and cancer are also applied. The development of the methodology and software was initiated and supported by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) taking up advice by the German Commission on Radiological Protection (SSK, Strahlenschutzkommission). These provide the scientific basis to support decision making on compensation claims regarding malignancies following occupational exposure to radiation in Germany.