The ICRP, MELODI, and ALLIANCE workshop on effects of ionizing radiation exposure in offspring and next generations: a summary of discussions.

PURPOSE: Task Group 121 - Effects of ionizing radiation exposure in offspring and next generations - is a task group under the Committee 1 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), approved by the Main Commission on 18th November 2021. The main goals of Task Group 121 are to (1) review and update the scientific literature of relevance to radiation-related effects in the offspring of parent(s) exposed to ionizing radiation in both human and non-human biota; (2) to assess preconceptional and intrauterine effects of radiation exposure and related morbidity and mortality; and, (3) to provide advice about the level of evidence and how to consider these preconceptional and postconceptional effects in the system of radiological protection for humans and non-human biota. METHODS: The Task Group is reviewing relevant literature since Publication 90 'Biological effects after prenatal irradiation (embryo and fetus)' (2003) and will include radiation-related effects on future generations in humans, animals, and plants. This review will be conducted to account for the health effects on offspring and subsequent generations in the current system of radiological protection. Radiation detriment calculation will also be reviewed. Finally, preliminary recommendations will be made to update the integration of health effects in offspring and next generations in the system of radiological protection. RESULTS: A Workshop, jointly organized by ICRP Task Group 121 and European Radiation Protection Research Platforms MELODI and ALLIANCE was held in Budapest, Hungary, from 31st May to 2nd June 2022. Participants discussed four important topics: (1) hereditary and epigenetic effects due to exposure of the germ cell line (preconceptional exposure), (2) effects arising from exposure of the embryo and fetus (intrauterine exposure), (3) transgenerational effects on biota, and (4) its potential impact on the system of radiological protection. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the discussions and presentations during the breakout sessions, newer publications, and gaps on the current scientific literature were identified. For instance, there are some ongoing systematic reviews and radiation epidemiology reviews of intrauterine effects. There are newer methods of Monte Carlo simulation for fetal dosimetry, and advances in radiation genetics, epigenetics, and radiobiology studies. While the current impact of hereditary effects on the global detriment was reported as small, the questions surrounding the effects of radiation exposure on offspring and the next generation are crucial, recurring, and with a major focus on exposed populations. This article summarizes the workshop discussions, presentations, and conclusions of each topic and introduces the special issue of the International Journal of Radiation Biology resulting from the discussions of the meeting.

Radiation exposure and leukaemia risk among cohorts of persons exposed to low and moderate doses of external ionising radiation in childhood.

BACKGROUND: Many high-dose groups demonstrate increased leukaemia risks, with risk greatest following childhood exposure; risks at low/moderate doses are less clear. METHODS: We conducted a pooled analysis of the major radiation-associated leukaemias (acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) with/without the inclusion of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML), acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL)) in ten childhood-exposed groups, including Japanese atomic bomb survivors, four therapeutically irradiated and five diagnostically exposed cohorts, a mixture of incidence and mortality data. Relative/absolute risk Poisson regression models were fitted. RESULTS: Of 365 cases/deaths of leukaemias excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, there were 272 AML/CML/ALL among 310,905 persons (7,641,362 person-years), with mean active bone marrow (ABM) dose of 0.11 Gy (range 0-5.95). We estimated significant (P < 0.005) linear excess relative risks/Gy (ERR/Gy) for: AML (n = 140) = 1.48 (95% CI 0.59-2.85), CML (n = 61) = 1.77 (95% CI 0.38-4.50), and ALL (n = 71) = 6.65 (95% CI 2.79-14.83). There is upward curvature in the dose response for ALL and AML over the full dose range, although at lower doses (<0.5 Gy) curvature for ALL is downwards. DISCUSSION: We found increased ERR/Gy for all major types of radiation-associated leukaemia after childhood exposure to ABM doses that were predominantly (for 99%) <1 Gy, and consistent with our prior analysis focusing on <100 mGy.

An Epidemiological Study of Lung Cancer and Selected Other Cancers among Namibian Uranium Workers.

The Rössing Uranium Limited (RUL) open-cast uranium mine in Namibia has operated since 1976. Studies of underground uranium miners from Europe and North America have shown increased cancer risks (principally lung cancer). We explored the association between radiation doses and selected cancers in RUL mineworkers. Employees with at least one-year of continuous employment between 1976 and 2010 were included. Incident cancer cases [lung, extra-thoracic airways (ETA), leukemia, brain and kidney] occurring before the end of 2015 were identified from the Namibian and South African National Cancer Registries, and RUL's occupational health provider. Using a case-cohort design, data on exposure and confounding factors were collected for all cancer cases among the study cohort and a stratified random sample (sub-cohort) of the cohort, including cases. Radiation doses were estimated based on annual dose records held by RUL. In total, 76 cancer cases (32 lung, 18 ETA, 8 leukemia, 9 brain, 9 kidney) and a sub-cohort of 1,121 sampled from 7,901 RUL employees were included. A weighted Cox model, adjusted for available known confounders, produced a rate ratio (95% CI) for lung cancer of 1.42 (0.42, 4.77) and 1.22 (0.26, 5.68), respectively, for medium and higher cumulative lung dose categories compared to the lower category, and 1.04 (0.95, 1.13) for a dose increase of 10 mSv. This study faced considerable challenges with respect to case ascertainment, exposure estimates, and ensuring accuracy of key variables. Persuasive consistent evidence for elevated cancer risk was not found for radiation or other exposures studied at the Rössing uranium mine.

Effective doses and risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations for male and female patients from childhood to old age.

The consideration of risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations and their justification commonly relies on estimates of effective dose, although the quantity is actually a health-detriment-weighted summation of organ/tissue-absorbed doses rather than a measure of risk. In its 2007 Recommendations, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) defines effective dose in relation to a nominal value of stochastic detriment following low-level exposure of 5.7 × 10-2Sv-1, as an average over both sexes, all ages, and two fixed composite populations (Asian and Euro-American). Effective dose represents the overall (whole-body) dose received by a person from a particular exposure, which can be used for the purposes of radiological protection as set out by ICRP, but it does not provide a measure that is specific to the characteristics of the exposed individual. However, the cancer incidence risk models used by ICRP can be used to provide estimates of risk separately for males and females, as a function of age-at-exposure, and for the two composite populations. Here, these organ/tissue-specific risk models are applied to estimates of organ/tissue-specific absorbed doses from a range of diagnostic procedures to derive lifetime excess cancer incidence risk estimates; the degree of heterogeneity in the distribution of absorbed doses between organs/tissues will depend on the procedure. Depending on the organs/tissues exposed, risks are generally higher in females and notably higher for younger ages-at-exposure. Comparing lifetime cancer incidence risks per Sv effective dose from the different procedures shows that overall risks are higher by about a factor of two to three for the youngest age-at-exposure group, 0-9 yr, than for 30-39 yr adults, and lower by a similar factor for an age-at-exposure of 60-69 yr. Taking into account these differences in risk per Sv, and noting the substantial uncertainties associated with risk estimates, effective dose as currently formulated provides a reasonable basis for assessing the potential risks from medical diagnostic examinations.

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 67th 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.

Radiation dose rate effects: what is new and what is needed?

Despite decades of research to understand the biological effects of ionising radiation, there is still much uncertainty over the role of dose rate. Motivated by a virtual workshop on the "Effects of spatial and temporal variation in dose delivery" organised in November 2020 by the Multidisciplinary Low Dose Initiative (MELODI), here, we review studies to date exploring dose rate effects, highlighting significant findings, recent advances and to provide perspective and recommendations for requirements and direction of future work. A comprehensive range of studies is considered, including molecular, cellular, animal, and human studies, with a focus on low linear-energy-transfer radiation exposure. Limits and advantages of each type of study are discussed, and a focus is made on future research needs.

The risk of cancer following high, and very high, doses of ionising radiation.

It is established that moderate-to-high doses of ionising radiation increase the risk of subsequent cancer in the exposed individual, but the question arises as to the risk of cancer from higher doses, such as those delivered during radiotherapy, accidents, or deliberate acts of malice. In general, the cumulative dose received during a course of radiation treatment is sufficiently high that it would kill a person if delivered as a single dose to the whole body, but therapeutic doses are carefully fractionated and high/very high doses are generally limited to a small tissue volume under controlled conditions. The very high cumulative doses delivered as fractions during radiation treatment are designed to inactivate diseased cells, but inevitably some healthy cells will also receive high/very high doses. How the doses (ranging from <1 Gy to tens of Gy) received by healthy tissues during radiotherapy affect the risk of second primary cancer is an increasingly important issue to address as more cancer patients survive the disease. Studies show that, except for a turndown for thyroid cancer, a linear dose-response for second primary solid cancers seems to exist over a cumulative gamma radiation dose range of tens of gray, but with a gradient of excess relative risk per Gy that varies with the type of second cancer, and which is notably shallower than that found in the Japanese atomic bomb survivors receiving a single moderate-to-high acute dose. The risk of second primary cancer consequent to high/very high doses of radiation is likely to be due to repopulation of heavily irradiated tissues by surviving stem cells, some of which will have been malignantly transformed by radiation exposure, although the exact mechanism is not known, and various models have been proposed. It is important to understand the mechanisms that lead to the raised risk of second primary cancers consequent to the receipt of high/very high doses, in particular so that the risks associated with novel radiation treatment regimens-for example, intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy that deliver high doses to the target volume while exposing relatively large volumes of healthy tissue to low/moderate doses, and treatments using protons or heavy ions rather than photons-may be properly assessed.

Cancer risks among studies of medical diagnostic radiation exposure in early life without quantitative estimates of dose.

BACKGROUND: There is accumulating evidence of excess risk of cancer in various populations exposed at acute doses below several tens of mSv or doses received over a protracted period. There is also evidence that relative risks are generally higher after radiation exposures in utero or in childhood. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We reviewed and summarised evidence from 89 studies of cancer following medical diagnostic exposure in utero or in childhood, in which no direct estimates of radiation dose are available. In all of the populations studied exposure was to sparsely ionizing radiation (X-rays). Several of the early studies of in utero exposure exhibit modest but statistically significant excess risks of several types of childhood cancer. There is a highly significant (p < 0.0005) negative trend of odds ratio with calendar period of study, so that more recent studies tend to exhibit reduced excess risk. There is no significant inter-study heterogeneity (p > 0.3). In relation to postnatal exposure there are significant excess risks of leukaemia, brain and solid cancers, with indications of variations in risk by cancer type (p = 0.07) and type of exposure (p = 0.02), with fluoroscopy and computed tomography scans associated with the highest excess risk. However, there is highly significant inter-study heterogeneity (p < 0.01) for all cancer endpoints and all but one type of exposure, although no significant risk trend with calendar period of study. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this large body of data relating to medical diagnostic radiation exposure in utero provides support for an associated excess risk of childhood cancer. However, the pronounced heterogeneity in studies of postnatal diagnostic exposure, the implied uncertainty as to the meaning of summary measures, and the distinct possibilities of bias, substantially reduce the strength of the evidence from the associations we observe between radiation imaging in childhood and the subsequent risk of cancer being causally related to radiation exposure.

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.

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.

Quantitative Bias Analysis of the Association between Occupational Radiation Exposure and Ischemic Heart Disease Mortality in UK Nuclear Workers.

The scientific question of whether protracted low-dose or low-dose-rate exposure to external radiation is causally related to the risk of circulatory disease continues to be an important issue for radiation protection. Previous analyses of a matched case-control dataset nested in a large cohort of UK nuclear fuel cycle workers indicated that there was little evidence that observed associations between external radiation dose and ischemic heart disease (IHD) mortality risk [OR = 1.35 (95% CI: 0.99-1.84) for 15-year-lagged exposure] could alternatively be explained by confounding from pre-employment tobacco smoking, BMI or blood pressure, or from socioeconomic status or occupational exposure to excessive noise or shiftwork. To improve causal inference about the observed external radiation dose and IHD mortality association, we estimated the potential magnitude and direction of non-random errors, incorporated sensitivity analyses and simulated bias effects under plausible scenarios. We conducted quantitative bias analyses of plausible scenarios based on 1,000 Monte Carlo samples to explore the impact of exposure measurement error, missing information on tobacco smoking, and unmeasured confounding, and assessed whether observed associations were reliant on the inclusion of specific matched pairs using bootstrapping with 10% of matched pairs randomly excluded in 1,000 samples. We further explored the plausibility that having been monitored for internal exposure, which was an important confounding factor in the case-control analysis for which models were adjusted, was indeed a confounding factor or whether it might have been the result of some form of selection bias. Consistent with the broader epidemiological evidence-base, these analyses provide further evidence that the dose-response association between cumulative external radiation exposure and IHD mortality is non-linear in that it has a linear shape plateauing at an excess risk of 43% (95% CI: 7-92%) on reaching 390 mSv. Analyses of plausible scenarios of patterns of missing data for tobacco smoking at start of employment indicated that this resulted in relatively little bias towards the null in the original analysis. An unmeasured confounder would have had to have been highly correlated (rp > 0.60) with cumulative external radiation dose to importantly bias observed associations. The confounding effect of "having been monitored for internal dose" was unlikely to have been a true confounder in a biological sense, but instead may have been some unknown factor related to differences over time and between sites in selection criteria for internal monitoring, possibly resulting in collider bias. Plausible patterns of exposure measurement error negatively biased associations regardless of the modeled scenario, but did not importantly change the shape of the observed dose-response associations. These analyses provide additional support for the hypothesis that the observed association between external radiation exposure and IHD mortality may be causal.

Overview of epidemiological studies of nuclear workers: opportunities, expectations, and limitations.

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.

Lymphoma and multiple myeloma in cohorts of persons exposed to ionising radiation at a young age.

There is limited evidence that non-leukaemic lymphoid malignancies are radiogenic. As radiation-related cancer risks are generally higher after childhood exposure, we analysed pooled lymphoid neoplasm data in nine cohorts first exposed to external radiation aged <21 years using active bone marrow (ABM) and, where available, lymphoid system doses, and harmonised outcome classification. Relative and absolute risk models were fitted. Years of entry spanned 1916-1981. At the end of follow-up (mean 42.1 years) there were 593 lymphoma (422 non-Hodgkin (NHL), 107 Hodgkin (HL), 64 uncertain subtype), 66 chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) and 122 multiple myeloma (MM) deaths and incident cases among 143,136 persons, with mean ABM dose 0.14 Gy (range 0-5.95 Gy) and mean age at first exposure 6.93 years. Excess relative risk (ERR) was not significantly increased for lymphoma (ERR/Gy = -0.001; 95% CI: -0.255, 0.279), HL (ERR/Gy = -0.113; 95% CI: -0.669, 0.709), NHL + CLL (ERR/Gy = 0.099; 95% CI: -0.149, 0.433), NHL (ERR/Gy = 0.068; 95% CI: -0.253, 0.421), CLL (ERR/Gy = 0.320; 95% CI: -0.678, 1.712), or MM (ERR/Gy = 0.149; 95% CI: -0.513, 1.063) (all p-trend > 0.4). In six cohorts with estimates of lymphatic tissue dose, borderline significant increased risks (p-trend = 0.02-0.07) were observed for NHL + CLL, NHL, and CLL. Further pooled epidemiological studies are needed with longer follow-up, central outcome review by expert hematopathologists, and assessment of radiation doses to lymphoid tissues.

Chromosome Aberrations in a Group of People Exposed to Radioactive Releases from the Three Mile Island Nuclear Accident and Inferences for Radiation Effects.

Recently, it has been proposed that the doses received from 133Xe released during the accident in 1979 at the Three Mile Island (TMI) plant in Pennsylvania were much higher than has been conventionally assessed, due to a gross underestimation of the relative biological effectiveness of electrons from beta-particle-emitting radionuclides within the body. The central evidence cited in support of this proposal was the doses derived from cytogenetic analyses of blood sampled in the mid-1990s from people living near TMI at the time of the accident. However, the chromosome aberration data show a marked discrepancy in biodosimetric estimates evaluated from the frequencies of stable translocations and unstable dicentrics (corrected for temporal attenuation), strongly suggesting that exposures to clastogenic agents occurred long after the TMI accident. Few details have been reported on the people providing the blood samples and how they were selected for study. Crucially, this lack of information includes the distributions in the exposed and control groups of age at sampling, which is a critical factor in interpreting translocation data. Contrary to the recent claim, these cytogenetic data offer no support to the suggestion of a serious underestimation of internal doses from beta particles or from 133Xe discharged during the TMI accident.

A review of the types of childhood cancer associated with a medical X-ray examination of the pregnant mother.

PURPOSE: For 65 years the interpretation of the statistical association between the risk of cancer in a child and a prior diagnostic X-ray examination of the abdomen of the pregnant mother has been debated. The objections to a direct cause-and-effect explanation of the association vary in their strength, but one of the most notable grounds for controversy is the finding from the first and largest case-control study reporting the association, the Oxford Survey of Childhood Cancers (OSCC), of an almost uniformly raised relative risk (RR) for nearly all of the types of cancer that are most frequent in children. Here we compare the antenatal X-ray associations found in the OSCC for different types of childhood cancer with the results of all other case-control and case-cohort studies appropriately combined in meta-analyses, and we also review the findings of the few cohort studies that have been conducted. CONCLUSIONS: From the case-control/case-cohort studies other than the OSCC there are consistent and clear elevations of risk for all types of childhood cancer combined, all leukemia, and all cancers except leukemia combined. This compatibility of the findings of the OSCC with those of the combined other studies is less clear, or effectively absent, when some categories containing smaller numbers of incident cases/deaths are considered, but lack of precision of risk estimates due to sparse data presents inferential challenges, although there is a consistent absence of an association for bone tumors. Further, more recent studies almost certainly address lower intrauterine doses, with an anticipated decrease in estimated risks, which could be misleading when comparisons involve a limited number of studies that are mainly from later years, and a similar problem arises when having to employ all types of antenatal X-ray exposures for a study because data for abdominal exposures are absent. The problem of low statistical power is greater for cohort studies, and this, together with other shortcomings identified in the studies, limits the interpretational value of results. The findings of non-medical intrauterine exposure studies are constrained by sparse data and make a limited contribution to an understanding of the association. Certain aspects of the various studies require a need for caution in interpretation, but overall, the appropriate combination of all case-control/case-cohort studies other than the OSCC lends support to the inference that low-level exposure to radiation in utero proportionally increases the risk of the typical cancers of childhood to around the same level.

A review of studies of childhood cancer and natural background radiation.

PURPOSE: The projected existence and magnitude of carcinogenic effects of ionizing radiation at low doses and low-dose rates is perhaps the most important issue in radiation protection today. Studies of childhood cancer and natural background radiation have the potential to throw direct light on this question, into a dose range below a few tens of mSv. This paper describes the studies that have been undertaken and their context, discusses some problems that arise and summarizes the present position. CONCLUSIONS: Many such studies have been undertaken, but most were too small to have a realistic chance of detecting the small effects expected from such low doses, based on risk projections from higher exposures. Case-control or cohort studies are to be preferred methodologically to ecological studies but can be prone to problems of registration/participation bias. Interview-based studies of the requisite size would be prohibitively expensive and would undoubtedly also run into problems of participation bias. Register-based studies can be very large and are free of participation bias. However, they need to estimate the radiation exposure of study subjects using models rather than individual measurements in the homes of those concerned. At present, no firm conclusions can be drawn from the studies that have been published to date. Further data and perhaps pooled studies offer a way forward.