No abstract

Objectives To provide direct estimates of risk of cancer after protracted low doses of ionising radiation and to strengthen the scientific basis of radiation protection standards for environmental, occupational, and medical diagnostic exposures. Design Multinational retrospective cohort study of cancer mortality. Setting Cohorts of workers in the nuclear industry in 15 countries. Participants 407 391 workers individually monitored for external radiation with a total follow-up of 5.2 million person years. Main outcome measurements Estimates of excess relative risks per sievert (Sv) of radiation dose for mortality from cancers other than leukaemia and from leukaemia excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, the main causes of death considered by radiation protection authorities. Results The excess relative risk for cancers other than leukaemia was 0.97 per Sv, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.97. Analyses of causes of death related or unrelated to smoking indicate that, although confounding by smoking may be present, it is unlikely to explain all of this increased risk. The excess relative risk for leukaemia excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia was 1.93 per Sv ( < 0 to 8.47). On the basis of these estimates, 1-2% of deaths from cancer among workers in this cohort may be attributable to radiation. Conclusions These estimates, from the largest study of nuclear workers ever conducted, are higher than, but statistically compatible with, the risk estimates used for current radiation protection standards. The results suggest that there is a small excess risk of cancer, even at the low doses and dose rates typically received by nuclear workers in this study.

The risk of cancer associated with a broad range of organ doses was estimated in an international study of women with cervical cancer. Among 150,000 patients reported to one of 19 population-based cancer registries or treated in any of 20 oncology clinics, 4188 women with second cancers and 6880 matched controls were selected for detailed study. Radiation doses for selected organs were reconstructed for each patient on the basis of her original radiotherapy records. Very high doses, on the order of several hundred gray, were found to increase the risk of cancers of the bladder [relative risk (RR) = 4.0], rectum (RR = 1.8), vagina (RR = 2.7), and possibly bone (RR = 1.3), uterine corpus (RR = 1.3), cecum (RR = 1.5), and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (RR = 2.5). For all female genital cancers taken together, a sharp dose-response gradient was observed, reaching fivefold for doses more than 150 Gy. Several gray increased the risk of stomach cancer (RR = 2.1) and leukemia (RR = 2.0). Although cancer of the pancreas was elevated, there was no evidence of a dose-dependent risk. Cancer of the kidney was significantly increased among 15-year survivors. A nonsignificant twofold risk of radiogenic thyroid cancer was observed following an average dose of only 0.11 Gy. Breast cancer was not increased overall, despite an average dose of 0.31 Gy and 953 cases available for evaluation (RR = 0.9); there was, however, a weak suggestion of a dose response among women whose ovaries had been surgically removed. Doses greater than 6 Gy to the ovaries reduced breast cancer risk by 44%. A significant deficit of ovarian cancer was observed within 5 years of radiotherapy; in contrast, a dose response was suggested among 10-year survivors. Radiation was not found to increase the overall risk of cancers of the small intestine, colon, ovary, vulva, connective tissue, breast, Hodgkin's disease, multiple myeloma, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. For most cancers associated with radiation, risks were highest among long-term survivors and appeared concentrated among women irradiated at relatively younger ages.

Our large cohort study indicates that various aspects of body size are related to the risk of prostate cancer and that future studies are needed to study the role of body size and prostate cancer.

Although vinyl chloride is an established cause of liver angiosarcoma, the evidence is inconclusive on whether it also causes other neoplastic and nonneoplastic chronic liver diseases as well as neoplasms in other organs. Furthermore, the shape of the dose-response relation for angiosarcoma is uncertain. We have extended for approximately 8 years the mortality and cancer incidence follow-up of 12,700 male workers in the vinyl chloride industry in four European countries. All-cause mortality was lower than expected, whereas cancer mortality was close to expected. A total of 53 deaths from primary liver cancer (standardized mortality ratio 2.40, 95% confidence interval = 1.80-3.14) and 18 incident cases of liver cancer were identified, including 37 angiosarcomas, 10 hepatocellular carcinomas, and 24 liver cancers of other and unknown histology. In Poisson regression analyses we observed a marked exposure response for all liver cancers, angiosarcoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The exposure-response trend estimated for liver cancer in analyses restricted to cohort members with cumulative exposures of <1,500 parts per million-years was close to that estimated for the full cohort (relative risk of 2.0 per logarithmic unit of cumulative dose). No strong relation was observed between cumulative vinyl chloride exposure and other cancers. Although cirrhosis mortality was decreased overall, there was a trend with cumulative exposure.

MSD increase with age. The variation between trades of MSD prevalence seems to correspond to the variation with respect to physical exposure.

Our large cohort study did not indicate any excess risk of colon cancer in males who were long-term heavy smokers and provided only weak support for an association with rectal cancer. Our data are thus consistent with the majority of previous reports. The reasons for the discrepancies in comparison with recent U.S. data have yet to be identified.

The relationship between breast cancer and radiation treatment for cervical cancer was evaluated in an international study of 953 women who subsequently developed breast cancer and 1,806 matched controls. Radiation doses to the breast (average 0.31 Gy) and ovaries (average 32 Gy) were reconstructed for exposed subjects on the basis of their original radiotherapy records. Overall, 88% of the breast cancer cases and 89% of the controls received radiation treatment [relative risk (RR) = 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.7-1.2]. Among women with intact ovaries (561 cases, 1,037 controls), radiotherapy was linked to a significant 35% reduction in breast cancer risk, attributable in all likelihood to the cessation of ovarian function. Ovarian doses of 6 Gy were sufficient to reduce breast cancer risk but larger doses did not reduce risk further. This saturation-type response is probably due to the killing of a critical number of ovarian cells. Cervical cancer patients without ovaries (145 cases, 284 controls) were analyzed separately because such women are at especially low natural risk for breast cancer development. In theory, any effect of low-dose breast exposure, received incidentally during treatment for cervical cancer, should be more readily detectable. Among women without ovaries, there was a slight increase in breast cancer risk (RR = 1.07; 95% CI = 0.6-2.0), and a suggestion of a dose response with the RR being 1.0, 0.7, 1.5 and 3.1 for breast doses of 0, 0.01-0.24, 0.25-0.49 and 0.50+ Gy, respectively. However, this trend of increasing RR was not statistically significant. If low-dose radiation increases the risk of breast cancer among women over age 40 years, it appears that the risk is much lower than would be predicted from studies of younger women exposed to higher doses.