1
|
Little MP, Hamada N. Low-Dose Extrapolation Factors Implied by Mortality and Incidence Data from the Japanese Atomic Bomb Survivor Life Span Study Data. Radiat Res 2022; 198:582-589. [PMID: 36161867 PMCID: PMC9797579 DOI: 10.1667/rade-22-00108.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2022] [Accepted: 09/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Assessment of the effect of low dose and low-dose-rate exposure depends critically on extrapolation from groups exposed at high dose and high-dose rates such as the Japanese atomic bomb survivor data, and has often been achieved via application of a dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor (DDREF). An important component of DDREF is the factor determining the effect of extrapolation of dose, the so-called low-dose extrapolation factor (LDEF). To assess LDEF models linear (or linear quadratic) in dose are often fitted. In this report LDEF is assessed via fitting relative rate models that are linear or linear quadratic in dose to the latest Japanese atomic bomb survivor data on solid cancer, leukemia and circulatory disease mortality (followed from 1950 through 2003) and to data on solid cancer, lung cancer and urinary tract cancer incidence. The uncertainties in LDEF are assessed using parametric bootstrap techniques. Analysis is restricted to survivors with <3 Gy dose. There is modest evidence for upward curvature in dose response in the mortality data. For leukemia and for all solid cancer excluding lung, stomach and breast cancer there is significant curvature (P < 0.05). There is no evidence of curvature for circulatory disease (P > 0.5). The estimate of LDEF for all solid cancer mortality is 1.273 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.913, 2.182], for all solid cancer mortality excluding lung cancer, stomach cancer and breast cancer is 2.183 (95% CI 1.090, >100) and for leukemia mortality is 11.447 (95% CI 2.390, >100). For stomach cancer mortality LDEF is modestly raised, 1.077 (95% CI 0.526, >100), while for lung cancer, female breast cancer and circulatory disease mortality the LDEF does not much exceed 1. LDEF for solid cancer incidence is 1.186 (95% CI 0.942, 1.626) and for urinary tract cancer is 1.298 (95% CI <0, 7.723), although for lung cancer LDEF is not elevated, 0.842 (95% CI 0.344, >100).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark P. Little
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-9778
| | - Nobuyuki Hamada
- Biology and Environmental Chemistry Division, Sustainable System Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), 2-11-1 Iwado-kita, Komae, Tokyo 201-8511, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Little MP, Wakeford R, Bouffler SD, Abalo K, Hauptmann M, Hamada N, Kendall GM. Review of the risk of cancer following low and moderate doses of sparsely ionising radiation received in early life in groups with individually estimated doses. ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL 2022; 159:106983. [PMID: 34959181 PMCID: PMC9118883 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106983] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2021] [Revised: 10/16/2021] [Accepted: 11/13/2021] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The detrimental health effects associated with the receipt of moderate (0.1-1 Gy) and high (>1 Gy) acute doses of sparsely ionising radiation are well established from human epidemiological studies. There is accumulating direct evidence of excess risk of cancer in a number of populations exposed at lower acute doses or doses received over a protracted period. There is evidence that relative risks are generally higher after radiation exposures in utero or in childhood. METHODS AND FINDINGS We reviewed and summarised evidence from 60 studies of cancer or benign neoplasms following low- or moderate-level exposure in utero or in childhood from medical and environmental sources. In most of the populations studied the exposure was predominantly to sparsely ionising radiation, such as X-rays and gamma-rays. There were significant (p < 0.001) excess risks for all cancers, and particularly large excess relative risks were observed for brain/CNS tumours, thyroid cancer (including nodules) and leukaemia. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the totality of this large body of data relating to in utero and childhood exposure provides support for the existence of excess cancer and benign neoplasm risk associated with radiation doses < 0.1 Gy, and for certain groups exposed to natural background radiation, to fallout and medical X-rays in utero, at about 0.02 Gy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark P Little
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-9778, USA.
| | - Richard Wakeford
- Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Ellen Wilkinson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Simon D Bouffler
- Radiation Effects Department, UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), Chilton, Didcot OX11 0RQ, UK
| | - Kossi Abalo
- Laboratoire d'Épidémiologie, Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, BP 17, 92262 Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedex, France
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Fehrbelliner Strasse 38, 16816 Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Nobuyuki Hamada
- Radiation Safety Unit, Biology and Environmental Chemistry Division, Sustainable System Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), 2-11-1 Iwado-kita, Komae, Tokyo 201-8511, Japan
| | - Gerald M Kendall
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Little MP, Pawel DJ, Abalo K, Hauptmann M. Response to "On the choice of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks" by Walsh et al. RADIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL BIOPHYSICS 2021; 60:515-516. [PMID: 34401930 PMCID: PMC10681271 DOI: 10.1007/s00411-021-00935-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2021] [Accepted: 08/08/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mark P Little
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892-9778, USA.
| | - David J Pawel
- Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20460, USA
| | - Kossi Abalo
- Laboratoire d'Épidémiologie, Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, BP 17, 92262, Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedex, France
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Fehrbelliner Strasse 38, 16816, Neuruppin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Visweswaran S, Raavi V, Abdul Syed Basheerudeen S, Kanagaraj K, Prasad A, Selvan Gnana Sekaran T, Pattan S, Shanmugam P, Ozimuthu A, Joseph S, Perumal V. Comparative analysis of physical doses and biomarker changes in subjects underwent Computed Tomography, Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography, and interventional procedures. MUTATION RESEARCH-GENETIC TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MUTAGENESIS 2021; 870-871:503404. [PMID: 34583824 DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2021.503404] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2021] [Revised: 08/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/11/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Even though the medical uses of ionizing radiation are well-acknowledged globally as vital tools for the improvement of human health, they also symbolize the major man-made sources of radiation exposure to the population. Estimation of absorbed dose and biological changes after radiation-based imaging might help to better understand the effects of low dose radiation. Because of this, we measured the Entrance Surface Dose (ESD) at different anatomical locations using Lithium tetraborate doped with manganese (Li2B4O7: Mn), recorded Dose Length Product (DLP) and Dose Area Product (DAP), analyzed Chromosomal Aberration (CA), Micronucleus (MN), gamma-H2AX (γ-H2AX), and p53ser15 proteins in the blood lymphocytes of patients (n = 267) underwent Computed Tomography (CT), Positron Emission Tomography-CT (PET/CT), and interventional procedures and healthy volunteers (n = 19). The DLP and effective doses obtained from PET/CT procedures were significantly higher (p < 0.05) when compared to CT. Fluoroscopic time and DAP were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in therapeutic compared to diagnostic interventional procedures. All the anatomical locations registered a significant amount of ESD, the ESD obtained from CT and interventional procedures were significantly (p < 0.05) higher when compared to PET/CT. Fluoroscopic time did not correlate with the ESD (eye, head, thyroid, and shoulder; R2 = 0.03). CA frequency after PET/CT was significantly higher (p < 0.001) when compared to CT and interventional procedures. MN frequency was significantly higher in 24-hs (p < 0.001) post-interventional procedure compared to 2-hs. The mean ± SD of mean fluorescence intensity of γ-H2AX and p53ser15 obtained from all subjects underwent PET/CT and interventional procedures did not show a significant difference (p > 0.05) between pre- and post-procedure. However, the relative fluorescence intensity of γ-H2AX and p53ser15 was >1 in 58.5 % and 65.8 % of subjects respectively. Large inter-individual variation and lack of correlation between physical dose and biomarkers suggest the need for robust dosimetry with a large sample size to understand the health effects of low dose radiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shangamithra Visweswaran
- Department of Human Genetics, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Venkateswarlu Raavi
- Department of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics, Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, 563 103, India
| | - Safa Abdul Syed Basheerudeen
- Department of Human Genetics, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Karthik Kanagaraj
- Department of Human Genetics, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Akshaya Prasad
- Department of Human Genetics, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Tamizh Selvan Gnana Sekaran
- Central Research Lab, K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, NITTE (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, 575 018, India
| | - Sudha Pattan
- Department of Radiology & Imaging Sciences, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Panneerselvam Shanmugam
- Department of Radiology & Imaging Sciences, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Annalakshmi Ozimuthu
- Safety, Quality & Resource Management Group, Health Safety and Environment Group, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu, 603 102, India
| | - Santhosh Joseph
- Department of Neuro-Radiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India
| | - Venkatachalam Perumal
- Department of Human Genetics, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600 116, India.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Walsh L, Shore R, Azizova TV, Rühm W. On the choice of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks. RADIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL BIOPHYSICS 2021; 60:493-500. [PMID: 34170393 PMCID: PMC8310494 DOI: 10.1007/s00411-021-00920-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2021] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
Recently, several compilations of individual radiation epidemiology study results have aimed to obtain direct evidence on the magnitudes of dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks. These compilations have relied on meta-analyses of ratios of risks from low dose-rate studies and matched risks from the solid cancer Excess Relative Risk models fitted to the acutely exposed Japanese A-bomb cohort. The purpose here is to demonstrate how choices of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks may influence the results reported for dose-rate effects. The current analysis is intended to address methodological issues and does not imply that the authors recommend a particular value for the dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor. A set of 22 results from one recent published study has been adopted here as a test set of data for applying the many different methods described here, that nearly all produced highly consistent results. Some recently voiced concerns, involving the recalling of the well-known theoretical point-the ratio of two normal random variables has a theoretically unbounded variance-that could potentially cause issues, are shown to be unfounded when aimed at the published work cited and examined in detail here. In the calculation of dose-rate effects for radiation protection purposes, it is recommended that meta-estimators should retain the full epidemiological and dosimetric matching information between the risks from the individual low dose-rate studies and the acutely exposed A-bomb cohort and that a regression approach can be considered as a useful alternative to current approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda Walsh
- Department of Physics, Science Faculty, University of Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Roy Shore
- Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, USA
| | - Tamara V. Azizova
- Southern Urals Biophysics Institute, Ozyorskoe shosse 19, Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk region 456780 Russia
| | - Werner Rühm
- Institute of Radiation Medicine, Helmholtz Zentrum München- German Research Center for Environmental Health, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|