Relative accuracy of grid references derived from postcode and address in UK epidemiological studies of overhead power lines

Childhood cancer research in Oxford II: The Childhood Cancer Research Group

BACKGROUND

We summarise the work of the Childhood Cancer Research Group, particularly in relation to the UK National Registry of Childhood Tumours (NRCT).

METHODS

The Group was responsible for setting up and maintaining the NRCT. This registry was based on notifications from regional cancer registries, specialist children's tumour registries, paediatric oncologists and clinical trials organisers. For a large sample of cases, data on controls matched by date and place of birth were also collected.

RESULTS

Significant achievements of the Group include: studies of aetiology and of genetic epidemiology; proposals for, and participation in, international comparative studies of these diseases and on a classification system specifically for childhood cancer; the initial development of, and major contributions to, follow-up studies of the health of long-term survivors; the enhancement of cancer registration records by the addition of clinical data and of birth records. The Group made substantial contributions to the UK government's Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment.

CONCLUSION

An important part of the ethos of the Group was to work in collaboration with many other organisations and individuals, both nationally and internationally: many of the Group's achievements described here were the result of such collaborations.

Comparative analyses of studies of childhood leukemia and magnetic fields, radon and gamma radiation

In this paper we compare the findings of epidemiologic studies of childhood leukemia that examined at least two of ELF magnetic fields and/or distance to power lines, and exposure to radon and gamma radiation or distance to nuclear plants. Many of the methodologic aspects are common to studies of non-ionising (i.e. ELF-MF) and ionising radiation. A systematic search and review of studies with more than one exposure under study identified 33 key and 35 supplementary papers from ten countries that have been included in this review. Examining studies that have looked at several radiation exposures, and comparing similarities and differences for the different types of radiation, through the use of directed acyclic graphs, we evaluate to what extent bias, confounding and other methodological issues might be operating in these studies. We found some indication of bias, although results are not clear cut. There is little evidence that confounding has had a substantial influence on results. Influence of the residential mobility on the study conduct and interpretation is complex and can manifest as a selection bias, confounding, increased measurement error or could also be a potential risk factor. Other factors associated with distance to power lines and to nuclear power plants should be investigated. A more complete and consistent reporting of results in the future studies will allow for a more informative comparison across studies and integration of results.

Residential mobility and associated factors in relation to the assessment of exposure to naturally occurring radiation in studies of childhood cancer

Migration, that is the study subjects moving from one residential address to another, is a complication for epidemiological studies where exposures to the agent of interest depend on place of residence [corrected]. In this paper we explore migration in cases from a large British case-control study of childhood cancer and natural background radiation. We find that 44% of cases had not moved house between birth and diagnosis, and about two-thirds were living within 2 km of their residence at birth. The estimated dose at the diagnosis address was strongly correlated with that at the birth address, suggesting that use of just the birth address in this case-control study does not lead to serious bias in risk estimates. We also review other individual-based studies of naturally occurring radiation, with particular emphasis on those from Great Britain. Interview-based case-control and cohort studies can potentially establish full residential histories for study subjects and make direct measurements of radiation levels in the dwellings in question. However, in practice, because of study size and difficulties in obtaining adequate response rates, interview-based studies generally do not use full residential histories, and a substantial proportion of dose estimates often derive from models rather than direct measurements. More seriously, problems of incomplete response may lead to bias, not just to loss of power. Record-based case-control studies, which do not require direct contact with study subjects, avoid such problems, but at the expense of having only model-based exposure estimates that use databases of measurements.