Radiation Carcinogenesis and DNA Alterations 1986
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4684-5269-3_1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Follow-up Studies of Patients Treated by X-Ray Epilation for Tinea Capitis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There was no significant dose-response for malignant brain tumours, and there were statistically significant differences between the risk coefficients for benign and malignant Japanese A-bomb Ն15 at exposure (Thompson et al, 1994) 3 15.0-Ͼ67.2 (32.9) 0.34 (Ͻ0, 1.52) 0.13 (Ͻ0, 0.52) Japanese A-bomb total (Thompson et al, 1994) Israeli tinea capitis children (Ron et al, 1988) 0-15 (7.3) 4.1 (2.9, 5.4) 4 -New York tinea capitis children (Albert et al, 1986) 1-19 (7.7) 3.4 (0.9, 7. brain tumours. There was no significant curvature in the radiation dose-response, whether linear or log-linear models were employed; nor were there significant modifications to the ionising radiation dose-response by number of dose fractions, sex, country of treatment, time since exposure, or age at exposure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There was no significant dose-response for malignant brain tumours, and there were statistically significant differences between the risk coefficients for benign and malignant Japanese A-bomb Ն15 at exposure (Thompson et al, 1994) 3 15.0-Ͼ67.2 (32.9) 0.34 (Ͻ0, 1.52) 0.13 (Ͻ0, 0.52) Japanese A-bomb total (Thompson et al, 1994) Israeli tinea capitis children (Ron et al, 1988) 0-15 (7.3) 4.1 (2.9, 5.4) 4 -New York tinea capitis children (Albert et al, 1986) 1-19 (7.7) 3.4 (0.9, 7. brain tumours. There was no significant curvature in the radiation dose-response, whether linear or log-linear models were employed; nor were there significant modifications to the ionising radiation dose-response by number of dose fractions, sex, country of treatment, time since exposure, or age at exposure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation, either due to nuclear disasters [31] or in cancer therapies [32][33][34][35], is a rare and known environmental risk factor for acute myeloid leukemia in childhood [1] and second primary neoplasms (SPNs) [1,29,[36][37][38][39]41]. Indeed gene-radiation interactions are assumed to be involved in the etiology of childhood cancer [1,42] and SPNs [43][44][45][46] as well.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The prognosis for children with this disease, unlike that for children with leukemia or lymphoma, has not improved substantially in recent decades [ 19]. Much of the information on this association comes from studies of cohorts of children who were exposed in utero when their mothers had X-ray pelvimetry late in pregnancy [26(16] and of cohorts of children who received X-ray treatment for ringworm of the scalp [2,21,25]. Although brain and nervous system tumors remain an important cause of death and disability in children aged 0-14, little is known about the causes of these tumors, which occur predominantly in the brain.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%