Circulatory disease in French nuclear fuel cycle workers chronically exposed to uranium: a nested case–control study

Zhivin, Sergey; Canu, Irina Guseva; Davesne, Estelle; Blanchardon, E.; Garsi, Jérôme-Philippe; Samson, Eric; Niogret, Christine; Zablotska, Lydia B.; Laurier, Dominique

doi:10.1136/oemed-2017-104575

Cited by 26 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, only a few studies have examined risks of exposures in the uranium processing industry, (Dupree et al 1987;Dupree-Ellis et al 2000;Pinkerton et al 2004;Boice et al 2008;Guseva Canu et al 2010;Nusinovici et al 2010;Richardson et al 2013;Silver et al 2013;Zablotska et al 2013;Gillies and Haylock 2014;Kreuzer et al 2015;Zhivin et al 2016;Yiin et al 2017;Bouet, Samson, et al 2018;Yiin et al 2018;Zhivin et al 2018;Bouet, Davesne, et al 2019;Golden et al 2019) and even fewer conducted dose-response analyses of uranium processing workers with individual radiation doses (Dupree-Ellis et al 2000;Guseva Canu et al 2010;Silver et al 2013;Zablotska et al 2013;Gillies and Haylock 2014;Kreuzer et al 2015;Zhivin et al 2016;Yiin et al 2017;Yiin et al 2018;Zhivin et al 2018;Golden et al 2019). These studies reported contradictory results, necessitating further research in this area.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Descriptive characteristics of occupational exposures and medical follow-up in the cohort of workers of the Siberian Group of Chemical Enterprises in Seversk, Russia

Карпов

Тахауов

Zerenkov

et al. 2021

International Journal of Radiation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To date, only a few studies have examined long-term health risks of exposures in the uranium processing industry and reported contradictory results, necessitating further research in this area. This is the first description of a cohort of $65,000 uranium processing workers (20.6% women) of the Siberian Group of Chemical Enterprises (SGCE) in Seversk, Russia, first employed during 1950-2010. Methods: SGCE is one of the largest and oldest uranium processing complexes in the world. SGCE workers at the Radiochemical, Plutonium, Sublimate and Enrichment plants were exposed to a combination of internal and external radiation, while workers at the Support Facility were primarily exposed to non-radiation factors. Results: Mean cumulative gamma-ray dose based on individual external dosimetry was 28.3 millisievert. About 4,000 workers have individual biophysical survey data that could be used for estimation of organ doses from uranium. SGCE workers were followed up for mortality and cancer incidence during 1950-2013 (vital status known for 80.8% of workers). The SGCE computerized database contains information on the results of regular medical examinations, and on smoking, alcohol and other individual characteristics. Conclusions: The SGCE cohort is uniquely suited to examine long-term health risks of exposures to gamma-radiation and long-lived radionuclides in uranium processing workers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Descriptive characteristics of occupational exposures and medical follow-up in the cohort of workers of the Siberian Group of Chemical Enterprises in Seversk, Russia

Карпов

Тахауов

Zerenkov

et al. 2021

International Journal of Radiation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While a substantial body of epidemiologic literature on occupational cohorts exposed to ionizing radiation exists, few have directly estimated dose-response associations for internal exposure with individual doses. The majority of these studies reported increases, though often not statistically significant, in radiation risks of lung cancer among workers with exposures to processed uranium (Chan et al 2010;Boice et al 2011;Silver et al 2013;Zablotska et al 2013;Kreuzer et al 2015;Zhivin et al 2018;Golden et al 2019). While several studies reported increased risk of kidney cancer from RDP exposure, uranium or uranium/external exposures (Boice et al 2011;Silver et al 2013;Zablotska et al 2013;Yiin et al 2018;Golden et al 2019), many were not statistically significant due to low statistical power, primarily related to small numbers of kidney cancers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…uranium enrichment workers), and they should be carefully evaluated in separate studies. To date, only a few studies have conducted dose-response analyses of uranium processing workers with individual radiation doses (Dupree-Ellis et al 2000;Guseva Canu et al 2010;Silver et al 2013;Zablotska et al 2013;Gillies and Haylock 2014;Kreuzer et al 2015;Zablotska et al 2018;Zhivin et al 2018;Golden et al 2019). A limited number of these studies estimated individual doses from uranium or other radionuclides (Silver et al 2013;Kreuzer et al 2015;Zhivin et al 2018;Golden et al 2019), and study findings were constrained by relatively small sample sizes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cohort profile: four early uranium processing facilities in the US and Canada

Golden

Milder

Ellis

et al. 2021

International Journal of Radiation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Pooling of individual-level data for workers involved in uranium refining and processing (excluding enrichment) may provide valuable insights into risks from occupational uranium and external ionizing radiation exposures. Methods: Data were pooled for workers from four uranium processing facilities (Fernald, Mallinckrodt and Middlesex from the U.S.; and Port Hope, Canada). Employment began as early as the 1930s and follow-up was as late as 2017. Workers were exposed to high concentrations of uranium, radium, and their decay products, as well as gamma radiation and ambient radon decay products. Exposure and outcome data were harmonized using similar definitions and dose reconstruction methods. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were estimated. Results: In total, 560 deaths from lung cancer, 503 non-malignant respiratory diseases, 67 renal diseases, 1,596 ischemic heart diseases, and 101 dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD) were detected in the pooled cohort of over 12,400 workers ($1,300 females). Mean cumulative doses were 45 millisievert for whole-body external ionizing radiation exposure and 172 milligray for lung dose from radon decay products. Only SMR for dementia and AD among males was statistically significant (SMR=1.29; 95% confidence interval: 1.04, 1.54). Conclusions: This is the largest study to date to examine long-term health risks of uranium processing workers.

show abstract

“…Such large amounts of data and of dose calculations require automation, whereas this is not the usual scenario for operational internal dose assessments in case of routine or special monitoring of exposed workers. Different programs were developed to derive annual absorbed doses for epidemiological studies: the Mayak Worker Dosimetry System-2013 for the Mayak cohort [47] , PuMA and IMBA for Sellafield workers [58] , InDep [48] for uranium enriched workers and DOSEPI for the TRACY cohort [46] .…”

Section: Differences Between Dose Evaluation For Radiation Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to assess internal doses for epidemiological studies and for emergency response? An overview of differences with routine operational radiation protection approach

Davesne

Olivier

López

2018

Radiation Measurements

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main aim of internal dosimetry in the frame of operational radiation protection is the evaluation of committed doses to verify the compliance of internal exposures with regulatory dose limits. To better understand the biological effects of internal exposures (cancer and non-cancer diseases), epidemiological studies can be conducted for estimating radiation-induced risks associated with intakes of radionuclides. In case of high levels of exposure when radiological events occur and for risk assessment, appropriate calculations of absorbed doses in Grays (Gy) to organs and tissues of exposed persons are required, but no reference methodology is currently available for internal dose assessments using data collected for epidemiology studies. Epidemiological studies and radiological emergency response in case of exposure to internal emitters may require different approaches, tools and methods for dose assessment comparing with operational internal dosimetry. This publication presents an overview of specific procedures associated with internal dosimetry for emergency response and epidemiology studies.

show abstract

Circulatory disease in French nuclear fuel cycle workers chronically exposed to uranium: a nested case–control study

Cited by 26 publications

References 33 publications

Descriptive characteristics of occupational exposures and medical follow-up in the cohort of workers of the Siberian Group of Chemical Enterprises in Seversk, Russia

Descriptive characteristics of occupational exposures and medical follow-up in the cohort of workers of the Siberian Group of Chemical Enterprises in Seversk, Russia

Cohort profile: four early uranium processing facilities in the US and Canada

How to assess internal doses for epidemiological studies and for emergency response? An overview of differences with routine operational radiation protection approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About