No abstract

No abstract

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.

No abstract

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.

No abstract

A cohort of 4831 persons aged 11-18 y in 1965 was identified among students in the schools of Washington County, UT; Lincoln County, NV; and Graham County, AZ. These children who had potentially been exposed to radioiodine from atomic weapons test fallout from the Nevada Test Site during 1951-1962 were selected for participation in a study of thyroid disease. The entire cohort was first examined during 1965-1968 for thyroid abnormalities. A total of 3,085 of these people were again reexamined during 1985-1986 to determine any subsequent occurrence of thyroid disease. In order to determine the relationship of the radiation dose to the thyroid with incidence of thyroid disease, we have developed a suite of models to calculate estimates of the internal dose received by the thyroid from fallout radioiodines. For completeness, the exposure to the thyroid from external radiation is also estimated. Dose estimates are made specific to each individual in the study using individual residential histories, the locality-specific exposure rate and radionuclide deposition, descriptions of dairy management for identified milk producers, and the subjects' sources of foods and intake rates of milk and leafy vegetables determined by interview. Other data such as the relationship of radioiodine deposition to measured exposure rate, environmental transfer parameters, and age-dependent factors for the conversion of radioiodine intake to thyroid dose were taken from work of other investigators. Dairy management information, milk distribution practices, the milk source for each study subject, as well as age-specific intake rates of milk and leafy vegetables, were determined by interview.

The primary aim of the epidemiologic study of one million U.S. radiation workers and veterans [the Million Worker Study (MWS)] is to provide scientifically valid information on the level of radiation risk when exposures are received gradually over time, and not within seconds as was the case for Japanese atomic-bomb survivors. The primary outcome of the epidemiologic study is cancer mortality but other causes of death such as cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular disease will be evaluated. The success of the study is tied to the validity of the dose reconstruction approaches to provide realistic estimates of organ-specific radiation absorbed doses that are as accurate and precise as possible and to properly evaluate their accompanying uncertainties. The dosimetry aspects for the MWS are challenging in that they address diverse exposure scenarios for diverse occupational groups being studied over a period of up to 70 y. The dosimetric issues differ among the varied exposed populations that are considered: atomic veterans, U.S. Department of Energy workers exposed to both penetrating radiation and intakes of radionuclides, nuclear power plant workers, medical radiation workers, and industrial radiographers. While a major source of radiation exposure to the study population comes from external gamma- or x-ray sources, for some of the study groups there is a meaningful component of radionuclide intakes that require internal radiation dosimetry assessments. Scientific Committee 6–9 has been established by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) to produce a report on the comprehensive organ dose assessment (including uncertainty analysis) for the MWS. The NCRP dosimetry report will cover the specifics of practical dose reconstruction for the ongoing epidemiologic studies with uncertainty analysis discussions and will be a specific application of the guidance provided in NCRP Report Nos. 158, 163, 164, and 171. The main role of the Committee is to provide guidelines to the various groups of dosimetrists involved in the MWS to ensure that certain dosimetry criteria are considered: calculation of annual absorbed doses in the organs of interest, separation of low and high linear-energy transfer components, evaluation of uncertainties, and quality assurance and quality control. It is recognized that the MWS and its approaches to dosimetry are a work in progress and that there will be flexibility and changes in direction as new information is obtained, both with regard to dosimetry and with regard to the epidemiologic features of the study components. This manuscript focuses on the description of the various components of the MWS, on the available dosimetry results, and on the challenges that have been encountered. It is expected that the Committee will complete its report in 2016.