The Past Informs the Future: An Overview of the Million Worker Study and the Mallinckrodt Chemical Works Cohort

Sex differences in radiation research

PURPOSE

The Sex Differences in Radiation Research workshop addressed the role of sex as a confounder in radiation research and its implication in real-world radiological and nuclear applications.

METHODS

In April 2022, HHS-wide partners from the Radiation and Nuclear Countermeasures Program, the Office of Research on Women's Health National Institutes of Health Office of Women's Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures Branch at the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority conducted a workshop to address the scientific implication and knowledge gaps in understanding sex in basic and translational research. The goals of this workshop were to examine sex differences in 1. Radiation animal models and understand how these may affect radiation medical countermeasure development; 2. Biodosimetry and/or biomarkers used to assess acute radiation syndrome, delayed effects of acute radiation exposure, and/or predict major organ morbidities; 3. medical research that lacks representation from both sexes. In addition, regulatory policies that influence inclusion of women in research, and the gaps that exist in drug development and device clearance were discussed. Finally, real-world sex differences in human health scenarios were also considered.

RESULTS

This report provides an overview of the two-day workshop, and open discussion among academic investigators, industry researchers, and U.S. government representatives.

CONCLUSIONS

This meeting highlighted that current study designs lack the power to determine statistical significance based on sex, and much is unknown about the underlying factors that contribute to these differences. Investigators should accommodate both sexes in all stages of research to ensure that the outcome is robust, reproducible, and accurate, and will benefit public health.

Mortality among Tennessee Eastman Corporation (TEC) uranium processing workers, 1943-2019

BACKGROUND

There are few occupational studies of women exposed to ionizing radiation. During World War II, the Tennessee Eastman Corporation (TEC) operated an electromagnetic field separation facility of 1152 calutrons to obtain enriched uranium (²³⁵U) used for the Hiroshima atomic bomb. Thousands of women were involved in these operations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A new study was conducted of 13,951 women and 12,699 men employed at TEC between 1943 and 1947 for at least 90 days. Comprehensive dose reconstruction techniques were used to estimate lung doses from the inhalation of uranium dust based on airborne measurements. Vital status through 2018/2019 was obtained from the National Death Index, Social Security Death Index, Tennessee death records and online public record databases. Analyses included standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Most workers were hourly (77.7%), white (95.6%), born before 1920 (58.3%), worked in dusty environments (57.0%), and had died (94.9%). Vital status was confirmed for 97.4% of the workers. Women were younger than men when first employed: mean ages 25.0 years and 33.0 years, respectively. The estimated mean absorbed dose to the lung was 32.7 mGy (max 1048 mGy) for women and 18.9 mGy (max 501 mGy) for men. The mean dose to thoracic lymph nodes (TLNs) was 127 mGy. Statistically significant SMRs were observed for lung cancer (SMR 1.25; 95% CI 1.19, 1.31; n = 1654), nonmalignant respiratory diseases (NMRDs) (1.23; 95% CI 1.19, 1.28; n = 2585), and cerebrovascular disease (CeVD) (1.13; 95% CI 1.08, 1.18; n = 1945). For lung cancer, the excess relative rate (ERR) at 100 mGy (95% CI) was 0.01 (-0.10, 0.12; n = 652) among women, and -0.15 (-0.38, 0.07; n = 1002) among men based on a preferred model for men with lung doses <300 mGy. NMRD and non-Hodgkin lymphoma were not associated with estimated absorbed dose to the lung or TLN.

CONCLUSIONS

There was little evidence that radiation increased the risk of lung cancer, suggesting that inhalation of uranium dust and the associated high-LET alpha particle exposure to lung tissue experienced over a few years is less effective in causing lung cancer than other types of exposures. There was no statistically significant difference in the lung cancer risk estimates between men and women. The elevation of certain causes of death such as CeVD is unexplained and will require additional scrutiny of workplace or lifestyle factors given that radiation is an unlikely contributor since only the lung and lymph nodes received appreciable dose.

Deep Breaths: A Systematic Review of the Potential Effects of Employment in the Nuclear Industry on Mortality from Non-Malignant Respiratory Disease

Ionizing radiation is an established carcinogen, but its effects on non-malignant respiratory disease (NMRD) are less clear. Cohorts exposed to multiple risk factors including radiation and toxic dusts conflate these relationships, and there is a need for clarity in previous findings. This systematic review was conducted to survey the body of existing evidence for radiation effects on NMRD in global nuclear worker cohorts. A PubMed search was conducted for studies with terms relating to radiation or uranium and noncancer respiratory outcomes. Papers were limited to the most recent report within a single cohort published between January 2000 and December 2020. Publication quality was assessed based upon UNSCEAR 2017 criteria. In total, 31 papers were reviewed. Studies included 29 retrospective cohorts, one prospective cohort, and one longitudinal cohort primarily comprising White men from the U.S., Canada and Western Europe. Ten studies contained subpopulations of uranium miners or millers. Papers reported standardized mortality ratio (SMR) analyses, regression analyses, or both. Neither SMR nor regression analyses consistently showed a relationship between radiation exposure and NMRD. A meta-analysis of excess relative risks (ERRs) for NMRD did not present evidence for a dose-response (overall ERR/Sv: 0.07; 95% CI: -0.07, 0.21), and results for more specific outcomes were inconsistent. Significantly elevated SMRs for NMRD overall were observed in two studies among the subpopulation of uranium miners and millers (combined n = 4229; SMR 1.42-1.43), indicating this association may be limited to mining and milling populations and may not extend to other nuclear workers. A quality review showed limited capacity of 17 out of 31 studies conducted to provide evidence for a causal relationship between radiation and NMRD; the higher-quality studies showed no consistent relationship. All elevated NMRD SMRs were among mining and milling cohorts, indicating different exposure profiles between mining and non-mining cohorts; future pooled cohorts should adjust for mining exposures or address mining cohorts separately.

Space flight and central nervous system: Friends or enemies? Challenges and opportunities for neuroscience and neuro-oncology

Space environment provides many challenges to pilots, astronauts, and space scientists, which are constantly subjected to unique conditions, including microgravity, radiations, hypoxic condition, absence of the day and night cycle, etc. These stressful stimuli have the potential to affect many human physiological systems, triggering physical and biological adaptive changes to re‐establish the homeostatic state. A particular concern regards the risks for the effects of spaceflight on the central nervous system (CNS), as several lines of evidence reported a great impact on neuroplasticity, cognitive functions, neurovestibular system, short‐term memory, cephalic fluid shift, reduction in motor function, and psychological disturbances, especially during long‐term missions. Aside these potential detrimental effects, the other side of the coin reflects the potential benefit of applicating space‐related conditions on Earth‐based life sciences, as cancer research. Here, we focused on examining the effect of real and simulated microgravity on CNS functions, both in humans and in cellular models, browsing the different techniques to experience or mime microgravity on‐ground. Increasing evidence demonstrate that cancer cells, and brain cancer cells in particular, are negatively affected by microgravity, in terms of alteration in cell morphology, proliferation, invasion, migration, and apoptosis, representing an advancing novel side of space‐based investigations. Overall, deeper understandings about the mechanisms by which space environment influences CNS and tumor biology may be promisingly translated into many clinical fields, ranging from aerospace medicine to neuroscience and oncology, representing an enormous pool of knowledge for the implementation of countermeasures and therapeutic applications.

Establishing a Communication and Engagement Strategy to Facilitate the Adoption of the Adverse Outcome Pathways in Radiation Research and Regulation

BACKGROUND

Studies on human health and ecological effects of ionizing radiation are rapidly evolving as innovative technologies arise and the body of scientific knowledge grows. Structuring this information could effectively support the development of decision making tools and health risk models to complement current system of radiation protection. To this end, the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) approach is being explored as a means to consolidate the most relevant research to identify causation between exposure to a chemical or non-chemical stressor and disease or adverse effect progression. This tool is particularly important for low dose and low dose rate radiation exposures because of the latency and uncertainties in the biological responses at these exposure levels. To progress this aspect, it is essential to build a community of developers, facilitators, risk assessors (in the private sector and in government), policy-makers, and regulators who understand the strengths and weaknesses of, and how to appropriately utilize AOPs for consolidating our knowledge on the impact of low dose ionizing radiation. Through co-ordination with the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) High-Level Group on Low-Dose Research (HLG-LDR) and OECD's AOP Programme, initiatives are under way to demonstrate this approach in radiation research and regulation. Among these, a robust communications strategy and stakeholder engagement will be essential. It will help establish best practices for AOPs in institutional project development and aid in dissemination for more efficient and timely uptake and use of AOPs. In this regard, on June 1, 2021, the Radiation and Chemical (Rad/Chem) AOP Joint Topical Group was formed as part of the initiative from the NEA's HLG-LDR. The topical group will work to develop a communication and engagement strategy to define the target audiences, establish the clear messages and identify the delivery and engagement platforms.

CONCLUSION

The incorporation of the best science and better decision-making should motive the radiation protection community to develop, refine and use AOPs, recognizing that their incorporation into radiation health risk assessments is critical for public health and environmental protection in the 21st century.

Dosimetry for the study of medical radiation workers with a focus on the mean absorbed dose to the lung, brain and other organs

BACKGROUND

The reconstruction of lifetime radiation doses for medical workers presents special challenges not commonly encountered for the other worker cohorts comprising the Million Worker Study.

METHODS

The selection of approximately 175,000 medical radiation workers relies on using estimates of lifetime and annual personal monitoring results collected since 1977. Approaches have been created to adjust the monitoring results so that mean organ absorbed doses can be estimated.

RESULTS

Changes in medical technology and practices have altered the radiation exposure environments to which a worker may have been exposed during their career. Other temporal factors include shifts in regulatory requirements that influenced the conduct of radiation monitoring and the changes in the measured dose quantities.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of leaded aprons during exposure to lower energy X rays encountered in fluoroscopically based radiology adds complexity to account for the shielding of the organs located in the torso when dosimeters were worn over leaded aprons. Estimating doses to unshielded tissues such as the brain and lens of the eye become less challenging when dosimeters are worn at the collar above the apron. The absence of leaded aprons in the higher energy photon settings lead to a more straightforward process of relating dosimeter results to mean organ doses.

Adverse Outcome Pathway: A Path towards better Data Consolidation and Global Co-ordination of Radiation Research

Background The purpose of toxicology is to protect human health and the environment. To support this, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), operating via its Extended Advisory Group for Molecular Screening and Toxicogenomics (EAGMST), has been developing the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) approach to consolidate evidence for chemical toxicity spanning multiple levels of biological organization. The knowledge transcribed into AOPs provides a structured framework to transparently organize data, examine the weight of evidence of the AOP, and identify causal relationships between exposure to stressors and adverse effects of regulatory perspective. The AOP framework has undergone substantial maturation in the field of hazard characterization of chemicals over the last decade, and has also recently gained attention from the radiation community as a means to advance the mechanistic understanding of human and ecological health effects from exposure to ionizing radiation at low dose and low dose-rates. To fully exploit the value of such approaches for facilitating risk assessment and management in the field of radiation protection, solicitation of experiences and active cooperation between chemical and radiation communities are needed. As a result, the Radiation and Chemical (Rad/Chem) AOP joint topical group was formed on June 1, 2021 as part of the initiative from the High Level Group on Low Dose Research (HLG-LDR). HLG-LDR is overseen by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) Committee on Radiation Protection and Public Health (CRPPH). The main aims of the joint AOP topical group are to advance the use of AOPs in radiation research and foster broader implementation of AOPs into hazard and risk assessment. With global representation, it serves as a forum to discuss, identify and develop joint initiatives that support research and take on regulatory challenges. Conclusion: The Rad/Chem AOP joint topical group will specifically engage, promote, and implement the use of the AOP framework to: a) organize and evaluate mechanistic knowledge relevant to the protection of human and ecosystem health from radiation; b) identify data gaps and research needs pertinent to expanding knowledge of low dose and low dose-rate radiation effects; and c) demonstrate utility to support risk assessment by developing radiation-relevant case studies. It is envisioned that the Rad/Chem AOP joint topical group will actively liaise with the OECD EAGMST AOP developmental program to collectively advance areas of common interest and, specifically, provide recommendations for harmonization of the AOP framework to accommodate non-chemical stressors, such as radiation.

Overview of epidemiological studies of nuclear workers: opportunities, expectations, and limitations. JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION 2021;41:1075-1092. [PMID: 34161930 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6498/ac0df4]

Epidemiological studies of those exposed occupationally to ionising radiation offer an important opportunity to directly check the assumptions underlying the international system of radiological protection against low-level radiation exposures. Recent nuclear worker studies, notably the International Nuclear Workers Study (INWORKS) and studies of the Mayak workforce in Russia, provide powerful investigations of a wide range of cumulative photon doses received at a low dose-rate over protracted periods, and broadly confirm radiation-related excess risks of leukaemia and solid cancers at around the levels predicted by standard risk models derived mainly from the experience of the Japanese atomic-bomb survivors acutely exposed principally to gamma radiation. However, the slope of the dose-response for solid cancers expressed in terms of the excess relative risk per unit dose, ERR/Gy, differs between INWORKS and Mayak, such that when compared with the slope derived from the atomic-bomb survivors, INWORKS does not provide obvious support for the use in radiological protection of a dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor greater than one whereas the Mayak workforce apparently does. This difference could be a chance effect, but it could also point to potential problems with these worker studies. Of particular concern is the adequacy of recorded doses received in the early years of operations at older nuclear installations, such as the potential for 'missed' photon doses. A further issue is how baseline cancer rates may influence radiation-related excess risks. There is scope for a considerable increase in the statistical power of worker studies, with longer follow-up capturing more deaths and incident cases of cancer, and further workforces being included in collaborative studies, but the difficulties posed by dosimetry questions should not be ignored and need to be the subject of detailed scrutiny.

Red risks for a journey to the red planet: The highest priority human health risks for a mission to Mars

NASA's plans for space exploration include a return to the Moon to stay-boots back on the lunar surface with an orbital outpost. This station will be a launch point for voyages to destinations further away in our solar system, including journeys to the red planet Mars. To ensure success of these missions, health and performance risks associated with the unique hazards of spaceflight must be adequately controlled. These hazards-space radiation, altered gravity fields, isolation and confinement, closed environments, and distance from Earth-are linked with over 30 human health risks as documented by NASA's Human Research Program. The programmatic goal is to develop the tools and technologies to adequately mitigate, control, or accept these risks. The risks ranked as "red" have the highest priority based on both the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of their impact on human health, performance in mission, and long-term quality of life. These include: (1) space radiation health effects of cancer, cardiovascular disease, and cognitive decrements (2) Spaceflight-Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (3) behavioral health and performance decrements, and (4) inadequate food and nutrition. Evaluation of the hazards and risks in terms of the space exposome-the total sum of spaceflight and lifetime exposures and how they relate to genetics and determine the whole-body outcome-will provide a comprehensive picture of risk profiles for individual astronauts. In this review, we provide a primer on these "red" risks for the research community. The aim is to inform the development of studies and projects with high potential for generating both new knowledge and technologies to assist with mitigating multisystem risks to crew health during exploratory missions.

Radiation induced cardiovascular disease: An odyssey of bedside-bench-bedside approach

The journey to Mars will be an ambitious, yet arduous task as it will entail culmination of all the information we have gathered over many decades. While the mission is of utmost importance, preservation of astronaut's well-being is paramount also. To that end, mitigation of radiation risk especially afflicting cardiovascular disease (CVD) is of great interest and challenge. Current data from astronauts on low earth orbit and Apollo missions provides insight on the risk of CVD from radiation exposure. However, data is limited given the small cohort size of astronauts who embarked on just nine prolonged missions. Therefore, a cerebral approach to understanding and mitigating risks are essential. This paper discusses the need for a predictive preclinical model to help understand and mitigate the effects of radiation on astronauts. We will discuss strengths and limitations of preclinical models and the methods of validating and constructing a model to predict human clinical outcomes. Our bedside-bench-bedside approach focuses on adapting the preclinical model through common investigative tools used between humans and animals. The result will be an optimization of preclinical model to a point of being a surrogate clinical model capable of predicting CVD outcomes in astronauts exposed to radiation.

Radiation-related health hazards to uranium miners

Concerns on health effects from uranium (U) mining still represent a major issue of debate. Any typology of active job in U mines is associated with exposure to U and its decay products, such as radon (Rn), thorium (Th), and radium (Ra) and its decay products with alpha-emission and gamma radiation. Health effects in U miners have been investigated in several cohort studies in the USA, Canada, Germany, the Czech Republic, and France. While public opinion is particularly addressed to pay attention to the safety of nuclear facilities, health hazard associated with mining is poorly debated. According to the many findings from cohort studies, the most significant positive dose-response relationship was found between occupational U exposure and lung cancer. Other types of tumors associated with occupational U exposure are leukemia and lymphoid cancers. Furthermore, it was found increased but not statistically significant death risk in U miners due to cancers in the liver, stomach, and kidneys. So far, there has not been found a significant association between U exposure and increased cardiovascular mortality in U miners. This review tries to address the current state of the art of these studies.

Challenges to the central nervous system during human spaceflight missions to Mars

Space travel presents a number of environmental challenges to the central nervous system, including changes in gravitational acceleration that alter the terrestrial synergies between perception and action, galactic cosmic radiation that can damage sensitive neurons and structures, and multiple factors (isolation, confinement, altered atmosphere, and mission parameters, including distance from Earth) that can affect cognition and behavior. Travelers to Mars will be exposed to these environmental challenges for up to 3 years, and space-faring nations continue to direct vigorous research investments to help elucidate and mitigate the consequences of these long-duration exposures. This article reviews the findings of more than 50 years of space-related neuroscience research on humans and animals exposed to spaceflight or analogs of spaceflight environments, and projects the implications and the forward work necessary to ensure successful Mars missions. It also reviews fundamental neurophysiology responses that will help us understand and maintain human health and performance on Earth.

A Cohort Study of Korean Radiation Workers: Baseline Characteristics of Participants

The Korean Radiation Worker Study investigated the health effects of protracted low-dose radiation among nuclear-related occupations in the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission in Korea. From 2016–2017, 20,608 workers were enrolled (86.5% men and 30.7% nuclear power plant workers). The mean cumulative dose ± standard deviation between 1984 and 2017 (1st quarter) was 11.8 ± 28.8 (range 0–417) mSv. Doses below recording level (≤0.1 mSv) were reported in 7901 (38.3%) cases; 431 (2%) had cumulative doses ≥100 mSv. From 1999–2016, 212 cancers (189 men, 23 women) occurred; thyroid cancer predominated (39.2%, 72 men, 11 women). In men, the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) for all cancers was significantly decreased (SIR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.66–0.88); however, that for thyroid cancer was significantly increased (SIR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.54–2.44). Compared to the non-exposed group (≤0.1 mSv), the relative risk (RR) in the exposed group (>0.1 mSv) after adjusting for sex, attained age, smoking status, and duration of employment was 0.82 (95% CI 0.60–1.12) for all cancers and 0.83 (95% CI 0.49–1.83) for thyroid cancer. The preliminary findings from this baseline study with a shorter follow-up than the latency period for solid cancer cannot exclude possible associations between radiation doses and cancer risk.

To Mitigate The Lnt Model's Unintended Consequences-A Proposed Stopping Point For As Low As Reasonably Achievable

While the debate over the linear no-threshold model continues, there's a relatively straightforward step that can be taken to mitigate the unintended consequences of the linear no-threshold model and the application of the as low as reasonably achievable principle-enact a stopping point for as low as reasonably achievable. The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements defined the negligible individual dose in 1993 as having a value of 0.01 mSv y. Radiation safety professionals overwhelmingly agree that applying the as low as reasonably achievable principle at very low doses, such as those consistent with background radiation levels, is not improving radiation safety of the public or radiation workers. To the contrary, this practice has significant financial and social consequences, and it severely inhibits public communication of radiation risks. To move forward, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements should increase the negligible individual dose to a more practical value of 0.1 mSv y-the new as low as reasonably achievable stopping point. While radiation research in radiation biology and epidemiology are needed to better understand low-dose health effects below 100 mSv, in the meantime we should apply what we know-i.e., that radiation protection should not include trying to protect people from radiation doses that are consistent with variations in background radiation.

Radiation epidemiology and health effects following low-level radiation exposure

Radiation epidemiology is the study of human disease following radiation exposure to populations. Epidemiologic studies of radiation-exposed populations have been conducted for nearly 100 years, starting with the radium dial painters in the 1920s and most recently with large-scale studies of radiation workers. As radiation epidemiology has become increasingly sophisticated it is used for setting radiation protection standards as well as to guide the compensation programmes in place for nuclear weapons workers, nuclear weapons test participants, and other occupationally exposed workers in the United States and elsewhere. It is known with high assurance that radiation effects at levels above 100-150 mGy can be detected as evidenced in multiple population studies conducted around the world. The challenge for radiation epidemiology is evaluating the effects at low doses, below about 100 mGy of low-linear energy transfer radiation, and assessing the risks following low dose-rate exposures over years. The weakness of radiation epidemiology in directly studying low dose and low dose-rate exposures is that the signal, i.e. the excess numbers of cancers associated with low-level radiation exposure, is so very small that it cannot be seen against the very high background occurrence of cancer in the population, i.e. a lifetime risk of incidence reaching up to about 38% (i.e. 1 in 3 persons will develop a cancer in their lifetime). Thus, extrapolation models are used for the management of risk at low doses and low dose rates, but having adequate information from low dose and low dose-rate studies would be highly desirable. An overview of recently conducted radiation epidemiologic studies which evaluate risk following low-level radiation exposures is presented. Future improvements in risk assessment for radiation protection may come from increasingly informative epidemiologic studies, combined with mechanistic radiobiologic understanding of adverse outcome pathways, with both incorporated into biologically based models.

The Million Person Study, whence it came and why

PURPOSE

The study of low dose and low-dose rate exposure is of immeasurable value in understanding the possible range of health effects from prolonged exposures to radiation. The Million Person Study (MPS) of low-dose health effects was designed to evaluate radiation risks among healthy American workers and veterans who are more representative of today's populations than are the Japanese atomic bomb survivors exposed briefly to high-dose radiation in 1945. A million persons were needed for statistical reasons to evaluate low-dose and dose-rate effects, rare cancers, intakes of radioactive elements, and differences in risks between women and men.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The MPS consists of five categories of workers and veterans exposed to radiation from 1939 to the present. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Health and Mortality study began over 40 years ago and is the source of ∼360,000 workers. Over 25 years ago, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) collaborated with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to effectively create a cohort of nuclear power plant workers (∼150,000) and industrial radiographers (∼130,000). For over 30 years, the Department of Defense (DoD) collected data on aboveground nuclear weapons test participants (∼115,000). At the request of NCI in 1978, Landauer, Inc., (Glenwood, IL) saved their dosimetry databases which became the source of a cohort of ∼250,000 medical and other workers.

RESULTS

Overall, 29 individual cohorts comprise the MPS of which 21 have been or are under active study (∼810,000 persons). The remaining eight cohorts (∼190,000 persons) will be studied as resources become available. The MPS is a national effort with critical support from the NRC, DOE, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), DoD, NCI, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Landauer, Inc., and national laboratories.

CONCLUSIONS

The MPS is designed to address the major unanswered question in radiation risk understanding: What is the level of health effects when exposure is gradual over time and not delivered briefly. The MPS will provide scientific understandings of prolonged exposure which will improve guidelines to protect workers and the public; improve compensation schemes for workers, veterans and the public; provide guidance for policy and decision makers; and provide evidence for or against the continued use of the linear nonthreshold dose-response model in radiation protection.

Recent Epidemiologic Studies and the Linear No-Threshold Model For Radiation Protection-Considerations Regarding NCRP Commentary 27

National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements Commentary 27 examines recent epidemiologic data primarily from low-dose or low dose-rate studies of low linear-energy-transfer radiation and cancer to assess whether they support the linear no-threshold model as used in radiation protection. The commentary provides a critical review of low-dose or low dose-rate studies, most published within the last 10 y, that are applicable to current occupational, environmental, and medical radiation exposures. The strengths and weaknesses of the epidemiologic methods, dosimetry assessments, and statistical modeling of 29 epidemiologic studies of total solid cancer, leukemia, breast cancer, and thyroid cancer, as well as heritable effects and a few nonmalignant conditions, were evaluated. An appraisal of the degree to which the low-dose or low dose-rate studies supported a linear no-threshold model for radiation protection or on the contrary, demonstrated sufficient evidence that the linear no-threshold model is inappropriate for the purposes of radiation protection was also included. The review found that many, though not all, studies of solid cancer supported the continued use of the linear no-threshold model in radiation protection. Evaluations of the principal studies of leukemia and low-dose or low dose-rate radiation exposure also lent support for the linear no-threshold model as used in protection. Ischemic heart disease, a major type of cardiovascular disease, was examined briefly, but the results of recent studies were considered too weak or inconsistent to allow firm conclusions regarding support of the linear no-threshold model. It is acknowledged that the possible risks from very low doses of low linear-energy-transfer radiation are small and uncertain and that it may never be possible to prove or disprove the validity of the linear no-threshold assumption by epidemiologic means. Nonetheless, the preponderance of recent epidemiologic data on solid cancer is supportive of the continued use of the linear no-threshold model for the purposes of radiation protection. This conclusion is in accord with judgments by other national and international scientific committees, based on somewhat older data. Currently, no alternative dose-response relationship appears more pragmatic or prudent for radiation protection purposes than the linear no-threshold model.

NCRP Vision for the Future and Program Area Committee Activities in 2018

The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements' (NCRP) congressional charter aligns with our vision for the future: to improve radiation protection for the public and workers. This vision is embodied within NCRP's ongoing initiatives: preparedness for nuclear terrorism, increasing the number of radiation professionals critically needed for the nation, providing new guidance for comprehensive radiation protection in the United States, addressing the protection issues surrounding the ever-increasing use of ionizing radiation in medicine (the focus of this year's annual meeting), assessing radiation doses to aircrew related to higher altitude and longer flights, providing guidance on emerging radiation issues such as the radioactive waste from hydraulic fracturing, focusing on difficult issues such as high-level waste management, and providing better estimates of radiation risks at low doses within the framework of the Million Person Study of Low-Dose Radiation Health Effects. Cutting-edge initiatives included a reevaluation of the science behind recommendations for lens of the eye dose, recommendations for emergency responders on dosimetry after a major radiological incident, guidance to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with regard to possible central nervous system effects from galactic cosmic rays (the high-energy, high-mass ions bounding through space), reevaluating the population exposure to medical radiation, and addressing whether the linear no-threshold model is still the best available for purposes of radiation protection (not for risk assessment). To address these initiatives and goals, NCRP has seven program area committees on biology and epidemiology, operational concerns, emergency response and preparedness, medicine, environmental issues and waste management, dosimetry, and communications. The NCRP vision for the future will continue and increase under the leadership of President-Elect Dr. Kathryn D. Held (Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, and current NCRP executive director and chief science officer). The NCRP quest to improve radiation protection for the public is hindered only by limited resources, both human capital and financial.

Sex-specific lung cancer risk among radiation workers in the million-person study and patients TB-Fluoroscopy

BACKGROUND

The study of Japanese atomic bomb survivors, exposed briefly to radiation, finds the risk of radiation-induced lung cancer to be nearly three times greater for women than for men. Because protection standards for astronauts are based on individual lifetime risk projections, this sex-specific difference limits the time women can spend in space. Populations exposed to chronic or fractionated radiation were evaluated to learn whether similar differences exist when exposures occur gradually over years.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Five occupational cohorts within the Million Person Study of Low-Dose Health Effects (MPS) and a Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study (CFCS) of tuberculosis patients who underwent frequent chest fluoroscopic examinations are evaluated. Included are male and female workers at the Mound nuclear facility, nuclear power plants (NPP), and industrial radiographers (IR). Workers at the Mallinckrodt Chemical Works and military participants at aboveground nuclear weapons tests provide information on the risk among males. Cox proportional hazards and Poisson regression models were used to estimate sex-specific radiation risks for lung cancer and to compare any differences.

RESULTS

Overall, 15,065 lung cancers occurred among the 443,684 subjects studied: 50,111 women and 395,573 men. The mean cumulative dose to the lung was 166.3 mGy (range 6 to 1,055 mGy) with the highest among the TB-fluoroscopy patients (mean 1,055 mGy). Mean lung dose for women in the worker cohorts was generally 4 times lower than for men. Of the 12 estimates of radiation-related risk, only one, for male IRs, showed a significant elevation (ERR 0.09; 95% CI 0.02-0.16, at 100 mGy). In contrast, the dose response for male NPP workers was negative (ERR -0.05; 95% CI -0.10, 0.01, at 100 mGy). Combined, these two cohorts provided little evidence for a radiation effect among males (ERR 0.01; 95% CI -0.04, 0.06, at 100 mGy). There was no significant dose-response among females within any cohort. There was no difference in the sex-specific estimates of lung cancer risk.

CONCLUSIONS

There was little evidence that chronic or fractionated exposures increased the risk of lung cancer. There were no differences in the risks of lung cancer between men and women. However, the sex-specific analyses are limited because of small numbers of women and relatively low doses. A more definitive study is ongoing of medical radiation workers which include 85,000 women and 85,000 men (overall mean dose 82 mGy, max 1,140 mGy). Additional understanding will come from the ongoing follow-up of the CFCS.

Case studies in brain dosimetry for internal emitters: Is more detail needed for epidemiology?

Element-specific biokinetic models are used to reconstruct doses to systemic tissues from internal emitters. These models typically depict explicitly only those tissues that tend to dominate the systemic behaviour of the element over time. The remaining tissues are aggregated into a pool called Other tissue in which activity is assumed to be uniformly distributed. Explicitly identified tissues usually consist of some subset of the tissues liver, kidneys, bone, bone marrow, gonads, thyroid, spleen, and skin.

Comprehensive dosimetry for seven exposure sources at the earliest US uranium processing facility

Mallinckrodt Chemical Works (MCW) was the earliest uranium processing facility in the United States, beginning in 1942. The 2,514 workers included in the epidemiologic study were exposed to external gamma radiation, medical x-rays, internal radiation from intakes of pitchblende ore and its extracted radionuclides (mainly uranium isotopes and radium-226), and ambient levels of radon and its progeny [1].

Implications of recent epidemiologic studies for the linear nonthreshold model and radiation protection

The recently published NCRP Commentary No. 27 evaluated the new information from epidemiologic studies as to their degree of support for applying the linear nonthreshold (LNT) model of carcinogenic effects for radiation protection purposes (NCRP 2018 Implications of Recent Epidemiologic Studies for the Linear Nonthreshold Model and Radiation Protection, Commentary No. 27 (Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements)). The aim was to determine whether recent epidemiologic studies of low-LET radiation, particularly those at low doses and/or low dose rates (LD/LDR), broadly support the LNT model of carcinogenic risk or, on the contrary, demonstrate sufficient evidence that the LNT model is inappropriate for the purposes of radiation protection. An updated review was needed because a considerable number of reports of radiation epidemiologic studies based on new or updated data have been published since other major reviews were conducted by national and international scientific committees. The Commentary provides a critical review of the LD/LDR studies that are most directly applicable to current occupational, environmental and medical radiation exposure circumstances. This Memorandum summarises several of the more important LD/LDR studies that incorporate radiation dose responses for solid cancer and leukemia that were reviewed in Commentary No. 27. In addition, an overview is provided of radiation studies of breast and thyroid cancers, and cancer after childhood exposures. Non-cancers are briefly touched upon such as ischemic heart disease, cataracts, and heritable genetic effects. To assess the applicability and utility of the LNT model for radiation protection, the Commentary evaluated 29 epidemiologic studies or groups of studies, primarily of total solid cancer, in terms of strengths and weaknesses in their epidemiologic methods, dosimetry approaches, and statistical modelling, and the degree to which they supported a LNT model for continued use in radiation protection. Recommendations for how to make epidemiologic radiation studies more informative are outlined. The NCRP Committee recognises that the risks from LD/LDR exposures are small and uncertain. The Committee judged that the available epidemiologic data were broadly supportive of the LNT model and that at this time no alternative dose-response relationship appears more pragmatic or prudent for radiation protection purposes.

The growing importance of radiation worker studies

Large radiation worker studies have the potential to provide precise risk estimates for protracted exposure to low-level ionising radiation. Recent worker studies have reported statistically discernible dose-related increased risks of cancer; however, results must be interpreted with care, and occupational radiation doses need to be treated with particular attention.