Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, Report 14, 1950-2003: an overview of cancer and noncancer diseases
- PMID: 22171960
- DOI: 10.1667/rr2629.1
Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, Report 14, 1950-2003: an overview of cancer and noncancer diseases
Erratum in
- Radiat Res. 2013 Apr;179(4):e40-1
Abstract
This is the 14th report in a series of periodic general reports on mortality in the Life Span Study (LSS) cohort of atomic bomb survivors followed by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation to investigate the late health effects of the radiation from the atomic bombs. During the period 1950-2003, 58% of the 86,611 LSS cohort members with DS02 dose estimates have died. The 6 years of additional follow-up since the previous report provide substantially more information at longer periods after radiation exposure (17% more cancer deaths), especially among those under age 10 at exposure (58% more deaths). Poisson regression methods were used to investigate the magnitude of the radiation-associated risks, the shape of the dose response, and effect modification by gender, age at exposure, and attained age. The risk of all causes of death was positively associated with radiation dose. Importantly, for solid cancers the additive radiation risk (i.e., excess cancer cases per 10(4) person-years per Gy) continues to increase throughout life with a linear dose-response relationship. The sex-averaged excess relative risk per Gy was 0.42 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.32, 0.53] for all solid cancer at age 70 years after exposure at age 30 based on a linear model. The risk increased by about 29% per decade decrease in age at exposure (95% CI: 17%, 41%). The estimated lowest dose range with a significant ERR for all solid cancer was 0 to 0.20 Gy, and a formal dose-threshold analysis indicated no threshold; i.e., zero dose was the best estimate of the threshold. The risk of cancer mortality increased significantly for most major sites, including stomach, lung, liver, colon, breast, gallbladder, esophagus, bladder and ovary, whereas rectum, pancreas, uterus, prostate and kidney parenchyma did not have significantly increased risks. An increased risk of non-neoplastic diseases including the circulatory, respiratory and digestive systems was observed, but whether these are causal relationships requires further investigation. There was no evidence of a radiation effect for infectious or external causes of death.
Comment in
-
Comments on "Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, report 14, 1950-2003: an overview of cancer and noncancer diseases" (Radiat Res 2012; 177:229-43).Radiat Res. 2012 Sep;178(3):244-5. doi: 10.1667/rr3039.1. Epub 2012 Jul 20. Radiat Res. 2012. PMID: 22817395 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998.Radiat Res. 2007 Jul;168(1):1-64. doi: 10.1667/RR0763.1. Radiat Res. 2007. PMID: 17722996
-
Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 13: Solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950-1997.Radiat Res. 2003 Oct;160(4):381-407. doi: 10.1667/rr3049. Radiat Res. 2003. PMID: 12968934
-
Solid Cancer Incidence among the Life Span Study of Atomic Bomb Survivors: 1958-2009.Radiat Res. 2017 May;187(5):513-537. doi: 10.1667/RR14492.1. Epub 2017 Mar 20. Radiat Res. 2017. PMID: 28319463 Free PMC article.
-
Dose response and temporal patterns of radiation-associated solid cancer risks.Health Phys. 2003 Jul;85(1):43-6. doi: 10.1097/00004032-200307000-00010. Health Phys. 2003. PMID: 12852470 Review.
-
Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part II: Solid tumors, 1958-1987.Radiat Res. 1994 Feb;137(2 Suppl):S17-67. Radiat Res. 1994. PMID: 8127952 Review.
Cited by
-
Lack of Correlation between Stem-Cell Proliferation and Radiation- or Smoking-Associated Cancer Risk.PLoS One. 2016 Mar 31;11(3):e0150335. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150335. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27031507 Free PMC article.
-
Evidence supporting radiation hormesis in atomic bomb survivor cancer mortality data.Dose Response. 2012 Dec;10(4):584-92. doi: 10.2203/dose-response.12-023.Doss. Epub 2012 Jul 13. Dose Response. 2012. PMID: 23304106 Free PMC article.
-
Luminal progenitor and mature cells are more susceptible than basal cells to radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks in rat mammary tissue.J Radiat Res. 2024 Sep 24;65(5):640-650. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rrae067. J Radiat Res. 2024. PMID: 39238338 Free PMC article.
-
Risk Communication Strategies: Lessons Learned from Previous Disasters with a Focus on the Fukushima Radiation Accident.Curr Environ Health Rep. 2016 Dec;3(4):348-359. doi: 10.1007/s40572-016-0111-2. Curr Environ Health Rep. 2016. PMID: 27796965 Review.
-
5 Reasons Why Scoliosis X-Rays Are Not Harmful.Dose Response. 2020 Sep 10;18(3):1559325820957797. doi: 10.1177/1559325820957797. eCollection 2020 Jul-Sep. Dose Response. 2020. PMID: 32963506 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources