Using personal monitoring data to derive organ doses for medical radiation workers in the Million Person Study-considerations regarding NCRP Commentary no. 30.

The study of low dose and low-dose rate exposure is of central importance in understanding the possible range of health effects from prolonged exposures to radiation. The One Million Person Study of Radiation Workers and Veterans (MPS) of low-dose health effects was designed to evaluate radiation risks among healthy American workers and veterans. The MPS is evaluating low-dose and dose-rate effects, intakes of radioactive elements, cancer and non-cancer outcomes, as well as differences in risks between women and men. Medical radiation workers make up a large group of individuals occupationally exposed to low doses of radiation from external x-ray/gamma exposures. For the MPS, about 100 000 United States medical radiation workers have been selected for study. The approach to the complex dosimetry circumstances for such workers over three to four decades of occupation were initially and broadly described in National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) Report No. 178. NCRP Commentary No. 30 provides more detail and describes an optimum approach for using personal monitoring data to estimate lung and other organ doses applicable to the cohort and provides specific precautions/considerations applicable to the dosimetry of medical radiation worker organ doses for use in epidemiologic studies. The use of protective aprons creates dosimetric complexity. It is recommended that dose values from dosimeters worn over a protective apron be reduced by a factor of 20 for estimating mean organ doses to tissues located in the torso and that 15% of the marrow should be assumed to remain unshielded for exposure scenarios when aprons are worn. Conversion coefficients relating personal dose equivalent,Hp(10) in mSv, to mean absorbed doses to organs and tissues,DTin mGy, for females and males for six exposure scenarios have been determined and presented for use in the MPS. This Memorandum summarises several key points in NCRP Commentary No. 30.

NCRP Report no.180-management of exposure to ionizing radiation: NCRP radiation protection guidance for the United States.

NCRP Report No. 180, 'Management of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation: Radiation Protection Guidance for the United States (2018)' was developed by Council Committee 1. The report builds and expands upon previous recommendations of NCRP and ICRP, covering exposure to radiation and radioactive materials for five exposure categories: occupational, public, medical, emergency workers, and nonhuman biota. Actions to add, increase, reduce or remove a source of exposure to humans require justification. Optimisation of protection universally applies, taking into account societal, economic, and environmental factors; addressing all hazards, and striving for continuous improvement when it is reasonable to do so. Numeric protection criteria for management of dose to an individual for a given exposure situation are provided, and differ in some respects from ICRP. A specific numeric criterion is suitable to be designated as a regulatory dose limit only when the source of exposure is stable, characterised, and the responsible organisation has established an appropriate radiation control program in advance of source introduction. Medical exposure includes patients, comforters and caregivers of a patient, and voluntary participants in biomedical research. Emergency workers are a new exposure category; their exposure is treated separately from occupational, public or medical exposure, and numeric criteria are provided for deterministic and stochastic effects. For nonhuman biota, the focus is on population maintenance of the affected species, and a guideline is provided for when additional assessment may be necessary. In addition, the recommendations emphasise that: ethical principles support decision-making; stakeholder engagement is necessary in deciding suitable management of their radiation exposure; and a strong safety culture is intrinsic to effective radiation protection programs.

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.

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.

Radiotherapy for childhood cancer and risk for congenital malformations in offspring: a population-based cohort study.

Offspring of childhood cancer survivors may be at risk of genetic disease due to the mutagenic cancer treatments received by their parents. Congenital malformations were evaluated in a population-based cohort study of 1715 offspring of 3963 childhood cancer survivors and 6009 offspring of 5657 survivors' siblings. The Danish Central Population Register, Cancer Registry and Hospital Register were used to identify study subjects and congenital malformations. Gonadal and uterine radiation doses were characterized based on standard radiation-treatment regimens. The prevalence of congenital malformations at birth in offspring of survivors (44 cases, 2.6%) was slightly higher but not statistically different from that of offspring of siblings (140 cases, 2.3%) [prevalence proportion ratio (PPR), 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-1.5] or of the general population (observed-to-expected ratio, 1.2; 0.9-1.6). Including malformations diagnosed later in life did not change the ratios appreciably. The risk for malformations was slightly higher in the offspring of irradiated parents than in that of non-irradiated parents (PPR 1.2 vs 1.0) but was unrelated to gonadal dose. This study provides evidence that cancer therapy of children does not increase the risk for malformations in their offspring. Continued monitoring of genetic risks among their offspring, however, is warranted.

New models for evaluation of radiation-induced lifetime cancer risk and its uncertainty employed in the UNSCEAR 2006 report.

Generalized relative and absolute risk models are fitted to the latest Japanese atomic bomb survivor solid cancer and leukemia mortality data (through 2000), with the latest (DS02) dosimetry, by classical (regression calibration) and Bayesian techniques, taking account of errors in dose estimates and other uncertainties. Linear-quadratic and linear-quadratic-exponential models are fitted and used to assess risks for contemporary populations of China, Japan, Puerto Rico, the U.S. and the UK. Many of these models are the same as or very similar to models used in the UNSCEAR 2006 report. For a test dose of 0.1 Sv, the solid cancer mortality for a UK population using the generalized linear-quadratic relative risk model is estimated as 5.4% Sv(-1) [90% Bayesian credible interval (BCI) 3.1, 8.0]. At 0.1 Sv, leukemia mortality for a UK population using the generalized linear-quadratic relative risk model is estimated as 0.50% Sv(-1) (90% BCI 0.11, 0.97). Risk estimates varied little between populations; at 0.1 Sv the central estimates ranged from 3.7 to 5.4% Sv(-1) for solid cancers and from 0.4 to 0.6% Sv(-1) for leukemia. Analyses using regression calibration techniques yield central estimates of risk very similar to those for the Bayesian approach. The central estimates of population risk were similar for the generalized absolute risk model and the relative risk model. Linear-quadratic-exponential models predict lower risks (at least at low test doses) and appear to fit as well, although for other (theoretical) reasons we favor the simpler linear-quadratic models.

Scope of radiological protection control measures.

In this report, the Commission recommends approaches to national authorities for their definition of the scope of radiological protection control measures through regulations, by using its principles of justification and optimisation. The report provides advice for deciding the radiation exposure situations that should be covered by the relevant regulations because their regulatory control can be justified, and, conversely, those that may be considered for exclusion from the regulations because their regulatory control is deemed to be unamenable and unjustified. It also provides advice on the situations resulting from regulated circumstances but which may be considered by regulators for exemption from complying with specific requirements because the application of these requirements is unwarranted and exemption is the optimum option. Thus, the report describes exclusion criteria for defining the scope of radiological protection regulations, exemption criteria for planned exposure situations, and the application of these concepts in emergency exposure situations and in existing exposure situations. The report also addresses specific exposure situations such as exposure to low-energy or low-intensity adventitious radiation, cosmic radiation, naturally occurring radioactive materials, radon, commodities, and low-level radioactive waste. The quantitative criteria in the report are intended only as generic suggestions to regulators for defining the regulatory scope, in the understanding that the definitive boundaries for establishing the situations that can be or need to be regulated will depend on national approaches.

Lung cancer risk from residential radon: meta-analysis of eight epidemiologic studies.

BACKGROUND: Studies of underground miners exposed to radioactive radon and its decay products have found that exposure increases risk of lung cancer. Consequently, when radon was found to accumulate in houses, there was concern about the public health impact from exposure to a known carcinogen. Estimates on the basis of studies of underground miners suggest that indoor radon may account for 6000-36,000 lung cancer deaths each year in the United States. Because of differences between working in underground mines and living in houses, estimates are subject to major uncertainties. Numerous case-control studies were launched to assess directly the lung cancer risk from indoor radon. Some studies report positive or weakly positive findings, while others report no increased risk. Thus, the potential hazard from indoor radon remains answered only indirectly through miner studies, experimental animal studies, and cellular studies. PURPOSE: To provide more information on the risk of lung cancer from indoor radon, we conducted a meta-analysis of all case-control studies that included at least 200 case subjects each and that used long-term indoor radon measurements. METHODS: Eight studies were available and included a total of 4263 lung cancer case subjects and 6612 control subjects. From the published results of each study, confounder-adjusted relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for categories of radon concentration were obtained, and weighted linear regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The combined trend in the RR was significantly different from zero (two-sided P = .03), and an estimated RR of 1.14 (95% CI = 1.0-1.3) at 150 Bq/m3 was found. An influence analysis indicated that no single study dominated the combined results. The exposure-response trend was similar to model-based extrapolations from miners and to RRs computed directly from miners with low cumulative exposures. However, there were significant differences in the study-specific estimates of the exposure response (two-sided P < .001), which were not explained by study differences in percent of the defined exposure interval covered by radon measurements, mean number of residences per subject, and other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analyses are valuable for identifying differences among studies and for summarizing results, but they should be interpreted cautiously when expected RRs are low as with indoor radon exposure, when there is study heterogeneity and where there is the potential for confounding and exposure misclassification. Nonetheless, the results of this meta-analysis suggest that the risk from indoor radon is not likely to be markedly greater than that predicted from miners and indicate that the negative exposure response reported in some ecologic studies is likely due to model misspecification or uncontrolled confounding and can be rejected. IMPLICATIONS: Until ongoing case-control studies of indoor radon are completed and the data are pooled and analyzed, the studies of underground miners remain the best source of data to use to assess risk from indoor radon. This meta-analysis provides support for their general validity.

Leukemia in women following radiotherapy for cervical cancer: ten-year follow-up of an international study.

An international collaborative study of 31,219 women treated for cervical cancer from 30 radiotherapy centers in nine countries was conducted. Patients were followed clinically and with blood studies between 1960 and 1970, and 148,000 woman-years (WY) were accumulated. Among 28,490 women treated with either intercavitary radium, external radiation, or both, 134,000 WY were accumulated and 13 cases of leukemia were observed. On the basis of general population rates, 15.5 cases were expected [relative risk (RR) = 0.8; 95% confidence limits (CL) = 0.4-1.4]. A twofold risk could thus be excluded, but a 1.4-fold risk remained possible. In absolute terms, risks larger than 0.1 leukemia cases per 10(6) WY-rad could be excluded. Among 2,729 cervical cancer patients not irradiated but similarly evaluated, 14,000 WY were accumulated and 2 cases of leukemia were observed as compared with 1.0 expected. In the interval 4-8 years after exposure, the period in which any leukemogenic effect might be most apparent, 7 cases of leukemia were observed among exposed patients as compared with 5.4 expected (RR - 1.3; 95% CL = 0.5-2.7). The absence of an increased leukemia risk suggested that the radiation regimens used to treat cervical cancer are not so effective in inducing leukemia as are other radiation exposures that have been studied.

Cancer mortality in women after repeated fluoroscopic examinations of the chest.

Among 1,047 women fluoroscopically examined in average of 102 times during pneumothorax therapy for tuberculosis and followed up to 45 years (average = 27 yr), no increase in the total number of cancer deaths occurred when these women were compared to 717 women who received other treatments [relative risk (RR) = 0.8]. However, elevated risks of mortality from stomach cancer (RR = 2.3), rectal cancer (RR = 3.8), breast cancer (RR = 1.2), lung cancer (RR = 1.8), and leukemia (RR = 1.2) were observed, but none was statistically significant and all were based on very small numbers of deaths. These increases were balanced by decreases of genital cancer (RR = 0.2), pancreatic cancer (RR = 0.9), lymphoma (RR = 0.6), and all other cancers (RR = 0.1). Average cumulative absorbed doses were 110 rads for the lungs, 33 rads for the trunk, 13 rads for the active bone marrow, and 7 rads for the stomach. The following upper levels of excess risk could be excluded with 95% confidence: 3.5 deaths/10(6) woman-year (WY)-rad for lung cancer, 4.8 deaths/10(6) WY-rad for lymphoma, and 12 deaths/10(6) WY-rad for leukemia. These findings indicated that the carcinogenic effect of multiple low-dose X-ray exposures was not greater than that currently assumed.

Cellular telephones and cancer--a nationwide cohort study in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Use of cellular telephones is increasing exponentially and has become part of everyday life. Concerns about possible carcinogenic effects of radiofrequency signals have been raised, although they are based on limited scientific evidence. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of cancer incidence was conducted in Denmark of all users of cellular telephones during the period from 1982 through 1995. Subscriber lists from the two Danish operating companies identified 420 095 cellular telephone users. Cancer incidence was determined by linkage with the Danish Cancer Registry. All statistical tests are two-sided. RESULTS: Overall, 3391 cancers were observed with 3825 expected, yielding a significantly decreased standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.86 to 0.92). A substantial proportion of this decreased risk was attributed to deficits of lung cancer and other smoking-related cancers. No excesses were observed for cancers of the brain or nervous system (SIR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.81 to 1.12) or of the salivary gland (SIR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.29 to 1.49) or for leukemia (SIR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.78-1.21), cancers of a priori interest. Risk for these cancers also did not vary by duration of cellular telephone use, time since first subscription, age at first subscription, or type of cellular telephone (analogue or digital). Analysis of brain and nervous system tumors showed no statistically significant SIRs for any subtype or anatomic location. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this investigation, the first nationwide cancer incidence study of cellular phone users, do not support the hypothesis of an association between use of these telephones and tumors of the brain or salivary gland, leukemia, or other cancers.

Cancer among epileptic patients exposed to anticonvulsant drugs.

Cancer incidence among 8,004 patients hospitalized for epilepsy between 1933 and 1962 in the Filadelfia treatment community in Denmark was compared to that of the general population. Patients received powerful and prolonged treatment with phenobarbital, phenytoin, and other anticonvulsants. This new survey extends the follow-up from 1976 through 1984. Among 7,864 patients with epilepsy not known to have received radioactive Thorotrast, record linkage with national cancer incidence files identified 789 cancers, compared to 664 expected [relative risk (RR) = 1.19; 95% confidence interval = 1.11-1.27]. Significant risks were found for cancers of the brain and central nervous system (RR = 5.7; n = 118) and the lung (RR = 1.4; n = 106). The excess numbers of brain cancer were concentrated within 10 years of hospitalization (RR = 20.7; n = 80) and decreased significantly over time, which suggests that brain tumors account for the seizure disorder and are not due to phenobarbital exposure as suggested by some epidemiologic studies. No overall risk was apparent when brain cancers were excluded (RR = 1.03). Because bladder cancer was significantly decreased (RR = 0.6; n = 18), the excess risk of lung cancer may not have been related to the "anecdotal" heavy smoking reported among confined groups of epileptic patients in the early years of the study period. The incidence of malignant melanoma was also significantly low (RR = 0.5; n = 7), which suggested limited exposure to sunlight among confined patients. The risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was increased, but not significantly (RR = 1.4; n = 16), which is interesting in view of previous reports suggesting an association with phenytoin. Overall, these data provide little evidence that phenobarbital and phenytoin are carcinogenic to humans, but the excess risks of lung cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma among epileptic patients in our study deserve further evaluation.

Cancer mortality after multiple fluoroscopic examinations of the chest.

Total cancer deaths were not increased among 2,074 women and 1,277 men who were fluoroscopically examined an average of 73 and 91 times, respectively, during lung-collapse therapy for tuberculosis (TB). Patients who did not receive this form of therapy (2,141 women and 1,418 men) and general population rates were used for comparison. All subjects were discharged alive from eight TB sanatoria in Massachusetts between 1930 and 1954; the average follow-up was 23 years. Deaths due to breast cancer were not increased among exposed females [standardized mortality ratio (SMR) = 1.0, n = 24], and SMRs greater than 2.1 could be excluded with 95% confidence. In contrast to other series, our inability to detect a breast cancer excess was likely due to lower breast doses (66 rad) and higher average ages at exposure (28 yr) and thus lower sensitivity. A deficit of lung cancer among exposed males and females was observed (SMR = 0.8, n = 26), even though increased risks have been observed among other populations exposed to similar dose levels. The estimated average lung dose was 91 rad, and SMRs greater than 1.2 for lung cancer could be excluded with 95% confidence. Overall, this study indicates that the radiation hazard of multiple low-dose exposures experienced over many years is not greater than currently accepted estimates for breast and lung cancer. For lung cancer the radiogenic risk may be less than predicted from high-dose, single-exposure studies.

Cancer among medical diagnostic x-ray workers in China.

Cancer incidence among 27,011 diagnostic x-ray workers was compared to that of 25,782 other medical specialists employed between 1950 and 1980 in China. X-ray workers had a 50% higher risk of developing cancer than the other specialists [relative risk (RR) = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.3-1.7]. Leukemia was strongly linked to radiation work (RR = 3.5, n = 30). Cancers of the breast (RR = 1.4, n = 11), thyroid (RR = 2.1, n = 7), and skin (RR = 1.5, n = 6) were increased among x-ray workers employed for 10 or more years. High risks of cancers of the esophagus (RR = 3.5, n = 15) and liver (RR = 2.4, n = 48) were not consistent with a radiation effect since risk did not vary by duration of employment. This finding suggested that some differences might exist between groups of hospital workers in social class, alcohol intake, dietary habits, and other risk factors. No excess lung cancer (RR = 0.9, n = 22) or multiple myeloma (n = 0) was observed. Significant excesses of leukemia and cancers of the breast and thyroid occurred among x-ray workers first employed prior to 1960 when radiation exposures in China were high. In fact, it was not uncommon for employees to be given time off from x-ray work because their wbc count was severely depressed. These data indicated that repeated exposure to x-rays over many years can increase the risk of leukemia and several other tumors but apparently not that of lung cancer.

Breast cancer in women with scoliosis exposed to multiple diagnostic x rays.

Although exposure to ionizing radiation is a recognized risk factor for breast cancer, the potential hazard from low-dose, fractionated exposures during early breast development has not been thoroughly evaluated. Women with scoliosis represent a valuable population for studying this issue because they are exposed to multiple diagnostic x rays during childhood and adolescence, times when the breast may be highly sensitive to the carcinogenic effects of radiation. A study was conducted of 1,030 women with scoliosis who were seen at four Minneapolis area medical facilities between 1935 and 1965. The average age at diagnosis was 12.3 years; 60% of the women had idiopathic scoliosis. Individual x-ray films were counted and the number per patient ranged from 0 to 618 films (mean, 41.5). On average, the x-ray exposures were given over an 8.7-year period. Ninety percent of the women were located, of whom over 92% responded to a mail questionnaire or telephone interview. The average period of observation was 26 years. Overall, 11 cases of breast cancer were reported, compared with six expected (standardized incidence ratio = 1.82, 90% confidence interval = 1.0-3.0). Excess risk increased with time since exposure and was highest among those followed for more than 30 years (standardized incidence ratio = 2.4). Risk also increased with the number of x rays and with the estimated radiation dose to the breast (mean, 13 rad). These data suggest that frequent exposure to low-level diagnostic radiation during childhood or adolescence may increase the risk of breast cancer.

Second cancers following radiotherapy for cervical cancer.

Incidence of second primary cancers was evaluated in 7,127 women with invasive cancer of the cervix uteri, diagnosed between 1935 and 1978, and followed up to 38 years (average, 8.9 yr) in Connecticut. Among 5,997 women treated with radiation, 449 developed second primary cancers compared with 313 expected (relative risk = 1.4) on the basis of rates from the Connecticut Tumor Registry. Excess incidence was noticeable 15 years or more after radiotherapy and attributed mostly to cancers of sites in or near the radiation field, especially the bladder, kidneys, rectum, corpus uteri, and ovaries. No excess was found for these sites among the 1,130 nonirradiated women. The ratio of observed to expected cancers for these sites did not vary appreciably by age at irradiation. The data suggested that high-dose pelvic irradiation was associated with increase in cancers of the bladder, kidneys, rectum, ovaries, corpus uteri, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma but, apparently, not leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, breast cancer, or colon cancer.

A retrospective cohort analysis of second breast cancer risk for primary breast cancer patients with an assessment of the effect of radiation therapy.

Second breast cancer experience was examined for 27,175 primary breast cancer patients diagnosed in the State of Connecticut during 1935-75 with follow-up for second breast cancers through 1980. The overall ratio of observed to expected second breast cancers was 3.2. Relative risk was found to be inversely related to age at diagnosis and directly related to stage of the first breast cancer. The overall risk of second breast cancers was 711 per 100,000 person-years at risk. Risk of second breast cancers showed a similar relationship to age and stage as relative risk and was also directly related to calendar period of diagnosis of the first breast cancer. Some interactions were observed because patients less than 45 years old at diagnosis with positive nodes had elevated risks and relative risks in the early followup period, whereas less of an effect of stage on relative risk and risk was seen for older patients. The effect of the use of adjunctive radiation therapy on second breast cancer risk was also assessed by the ratio of the risk of second breast cancers for those patients who received both surgery and radiation to the risk of those patients who only received surgery being estimated for patients diagnosed during 1935-59 and for patients diagnosed during 1960-75. For both cohorts relative risks of 1.2-1.4 were found for the 5-year period immediately following diagnosis, likely resulting from the uncontrolled effect of stage in the analysis. Elevated long-term relative risks were not found for patients diagnosed during 1935-59. A long-term marginally statistically significant relative risk of 1.4 (greater than or equal to 10 yr after diagnosis) was found for patients diagnosed during 1960-75. The data do not indicate an overall pattern of relative risks consistent with an effect on long-term second breast cancer risk of radiation exposure to the opposite breast incurred during adjunctive radiation therapy for a first breast cancer.

Residential radon exposure and lung cancer among nonsmoking women.

BACKGROUND: Radon at sufficiently high concentrations is known to cause lung cancer among underground miners and in experimental laboratory animals. PURPOSE: Our aim was to determine whether indoor levels of radon are associated with a detectable increase in lung cancer. Nonsmoking women were selected because they offer the best opportunity to detect radon-related risk while minimizing the potentially confounding influences of cigarette smoking and occupation. METHODS: A population-based, case-control study of incident lung cancer was conducted in Missouri. A total of 538 non-smoking white women diagnosed with lung cancer between 1986 and 1992 and 1183 age-matched control subjects were identified from the Missouri Cancer Registry and from driver's license and Medicare listings, respectively. Information on lung cancer risk factors was obtained by telephone interview. Year-long radon measurements were sought in every dwelling occupied for the previous 5-30 years. RESULTS: Radon measurements covered 78% of the relevant residential period, and women reported being indoors for 84% of this time. The time-weighted average radon concentrations were exactly the same for case subjects and control subjects (1.82 pCi/L of air [pCi L-1]). Radon levels greater than 4 pCi L-1 were experienced by 6.5% of the case subjects and 6.8% of the control subjects. For all data combined, there was little evidence for a trend of lung cancer with increasing radon concentrations (two-tailed trend test, P = .99 continuous data analysis; P = .19 categorical data analysis). A positive dose-response trend was suggested for the adenocarcinoma cell type and among directly interviewed women (two-tailed trend test; P = .31 continuous data analysis; P = .04 categorical data analysis), but not for other histologies or among those who had surrogate interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The possibility of detecting a risk from indoor radon in this study was maximized by (a) including a large number of nonsmoking women with high indoor occupancy, (b) conducting a large number of radon measurements near the time of the diagnosis of cancer, and (c) controlling for known causes of lung cancer. However, an association between lung cancer and the exposure to domestic levels of radon was not convincingly demonstrated. IMPLICATIONS: The magnitude of the lung cancer risk from radon levels commonly found in U.S. dwellings appears low.

Cancer following radiotherapy for peptic ulcer.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy for peptic ulcer was used between 1937 and 1965 to control excessive gastric acid secretions (mean dose, 14.8 Gy). Patients with this benign condition live many years after treatment and are at risk for late effects. PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate the risk of death from cancer following radiotherapy for peptic ulcer. METHODS: A mortality study was conducted of 3609 patients with peptic ulcer; 1831 were treated with radiation and 1778 were treated by other means. Extensive methods were used to trace patients. Radiation doses to specific organs were reconstructed from the original radiotherapy records. RESULTS: Nearly 70% of patients were found to have died. The average period of observation was 21.5 years (maximum 51 years). Compared with the general population, patients treated with or without radiation were at significantly increased risk of dying of cancer and non-malignant diseases of the digestive system. Risk of death due to heart disease was slightly higher following radiotherapy. Cancers of the stomach, pancreas, lung, and prostate were increased in both irradiated and nonirradiated patients. Radiotherapy was linked to significantly high relative risks (RRs) for all cancers combined (RR = 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3-1.8), for cancers of the stomach (RR = 2.77; 95% CI = 1.6-4.8), pancreas (RR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.0-3.4), and lung (RR = 1.70; 95% CI = 1.2-2.4), and for leukemia (RR = 3.28; 95% CI = 1.0-10.6). Radiation combined with surgery, or given to treat gastric ulcer, appeared to increase the risk of stomach cancer 10-fold, which was greater than the sum of individual effects. Patients with gastric ulcers were at higher risk for stomach cancer than patients with duodenal ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with peptic ulcer are at increased risk of dying of cancer, related in part to lifestyle factors and treatment. Radiotherapy and surgery together appear to induce carcinogenic processes that greatly enhance the development of stomach cancer. The risk of radiation-induced stomach cancer was 0.25 extra deaths per 10,000 persons per year per Gy, somewhat lower than reported in other studies. High-dose radiation may have increased the risk of pancreatic cancer, a condition rarely found elevated in irradiated populations, but misclassified death notices may have contributed to the excess. Cancer mortality remained high for up to 50 years, indicating that radiation damage may persist to the end of life.