2003
DOI: 10.1002/ajim.10306
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cancer mortality among French Atomic Energy Commission workers

Abstract: Excesses observed will have to be related to occupational exposures in the on-going cohort study on French nuclear workers which includes a retrospective exposures assessment.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

2
25
1
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
25
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although our study shows a particularly strong HWE, our results are very similar to those obtained from the other two French nuclear worker cohorts [Telle-Lamberton et al, 2004;Rogel et al, 2005]. All-cause mortality for workers employed by EDF or CEA is much lower than that of the national population with SMRs, respectively, attaining 0.48 and 0.58 compared to 0.54 in our cohort.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although our study shows a particularly strong HWE, our results are very similar to those obtained from the other two French nuclear worker cohorts [Telle-Lamberton et al, 2004;Rogel et al, 2005]. All-cause mortality for workers employed by EDF or CEA is much lower than that of the national population with SMRs, respectively, attaining 0.48 and 0.58 compared to 0.54 in our cohort.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
“…Compared to the other French nuclear worker cohorts, our cohort included a larger proportion of workers with a cumulative dose above 200 mSv (3.2%) than EDF (0.4%) or CEA (0.4%), confirming higher exposure of contract workers to ionizing radiation than that of workers in the other two cohorts [Telle-Lamberton et al, 2004;Rogel et al, 2005]. The mean cumulative dose observed in our cohort was much higher (33.5 mSv) than in most of the studies on nuclear workers [19.4 mSv for the 15-country collaborative cohort study, 10 mSv in the American cohort of the Idaho National Laboratory, and 8.3 mSv in the CEA cohort, Cardis et al, 2007;Telle-Lamberton et al, 2007] due to the higher proportion of workers exposed to cumulative doses above 200 mSv.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In addition, the results obtained might be difficult to interpret if elderly participants would have continued working shifts because of higher levels of health than that of the operators who were unable to do so ("the healthy worker effect") 42,43) . Although the study subjects worked a variety of different jobs at the plants, they do represent a single occupational group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] Sanders and Jackson 23 reported that 27% of rats treated with plutonium particles developed malignant mesotheliomas and concluded that the pathogenesis of malignant mesotheliomas induced by radioactive particles seemed similar to that of mesothelioma after intracavitary administration of asbestos. Several forms of ionizing radiation have been related to the development of malignant mesothelioma, including administration of Thorotrast (an x-ray contrast medium), 24 working at nuclear facilities, [25][26] and radiation treatment for first primary malignancies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] Sanders and Jackson 23 reported that 27% of rats treated with plutonium particles developed malignant mesotheliomas and concluded that the pathogenesis of malignant mesotheliomas induced by radioactive particles seemed similar to that of mesothelioma after intracavitary administration of asbestos. Several forms of ionizing radiation have been related to the development of malignant mesothelioma, including administration of Thorotrast (an x-ray contrast medium), 24 working at nuclear facilities, [25][26] and radiation treatment for first primary malignancies. [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] Case reports [29][30][31][32][33] of patients developing malignant mesothelioma within or adjacent to radiation fields were followed by large-scale retrospective cohort studies, using data from the US National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, indicating an increased risk of malignant mesothelioma in patients receiving radiotherapy for primary malignancies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%