Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26487649›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2015

Risk of cancer from occupational exposure to ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study of workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS).

David B Richardson, Elisabeth Cardis, Robert D Daniels, Michael Gillies, Jacqueline A O'Hagan, Ghassan B Hamra, Richard Haylock, Dominique Laurier, Klervi Leuraud, Monika Moissonnier and 3 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 131 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

131 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Somatic health effects of Chernobyl: 30 years on.European journal of epidemiology · 2017
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. 50% reduction of intraoperative radiation in orthopedics: impact of using the fluoroscopy's lowest possible radiation settings.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Nonfluoroscopic 3D Image Guidance System Reduces Navigation Times Through Five 3D-Printed Iliofemoral Vascular Phantoms.Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Equine Standing Multidetector Computed Tomography of the Distal Thoracic Limb and Tarsus Has a Lower Cumulative Radiation Dose than Digital Radiography.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

David B RichardsonDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA david.richardson@unc.edu.
Elisabeth CardisCenter for Research in Environmental Epidemiology, Barcelona, Spain Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública, Madrid, Spain.
Robert D DanielsNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Michael GilliesPublic Health England Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, UK.
Jacqueline A O'HaganPublic Health England Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, UK.
Ghassan B HamraDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, Drexel University School of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Richard HaylockPublic Health England Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, UK.
Dominique LaurierInstitut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Klervi LeuraudInstitut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Monika MoissonnierInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Mary K Schubauer-BeriganNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Isabelle Thierry-ChefInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Ausrele KesminieneInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.

Funding

UNC-CH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH &SUSCEPTIBILITYP30ES010126 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Melissa A. Troester · 2001 to 2026
$36.3M
Combined analysis of mortality among nuclear workersR03OH010056 · OH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI RICHARDSON, DAVID B · 2011 to 2012
$140k
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES010126NIOSH CDC HHS 5R03 OH010056-02World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionIs protracted exposure to low doses of ionising radiation associated with an increased risk of solid cancer?

methodsIn this cohort study, 308,297 workers in the nuclear industry from France, the United Kingdom, and the United States with detailed monitoring data for external exposure to ionising radiation were linked to death registries. Excess relative rate per Gy of radiation dose for mortality from cancer was estimated. Follow-up encompassed 8.2 million person years. Of 66,632 known deaths by the end of follow-up, 17,957 were due to solid cancers. STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS: Results suggest a linear increase in the rate of cancer with increasing radiation exposure. The average cumulative colon dose estimated among exposed workers was 20.9 mGy (median 4.1 mGy). The estimated rate of mortality from all cancers excluding leukaemia increased with cumulative dose by 48% per Gy (90% confidence interval 20% to 79%), lagged by 10 years. Similar associations were seen for mortality from all solid cancers (47% (18% to 79%)), and within each country. The estimated association over the dose range of 0-100 mGy was similar in magnitude to that obtained over the entire dose range but less precise. Smoking and occupational asbestos exposure are potential confounders; however, exclusion of deaths from lung cancer and pleural cancer did not affect the estimated association. Despite substantial efforts to characterise the performance of the radiation dosimeters used, the possibility of measurement error remains. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: The study provides a direct estimate of the association between protracted low dose exposure to ionising radiation and solid cancer mortality. Although high dose rate exposures are thought to be more dangerous than low dose rate exposures, the risk per unit of radiation dose for cancer among radiation workers was similar to estimates derived from studies of Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Quantifying the cancer risks associated with protracted radiation exposures can help strengthen the foundation for radiation protection standards. FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: Support from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan; Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire; AREVA; Electricité de France; US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; US Department of Energy; and Public Health England. Data are maintained and kept at the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

Indexed as

ForecastingIndustryOccupational DiseasesRegistriesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFranceHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedOccupational ExposureRadiation DosageRadiation, IonizingRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID26487649
PMCPMC4612459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.