ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2016
Radiation risk models for all solid cancers other than those types of cancer requiring individual assessments after a nuclear accident.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Thyroid Cancer Following Childhood Low-Dose Radiation Exposure: A Pooled Analysis of Nine Cohorts.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the assessment of health risks after nuclear accidents, some health consequences require special attention. For example, in their 2013 report on health risk assessment after the Fukushima nuclear accident, the World Health Organisation (WHO) panel of experts considered risks of breast cancer, thyroid cancer and leukaemia. For these specific cancer types, use was made of already published excess relative risk (ERR) and excess absolute risk (EAR) models for radiation-related cancer incidence fitted to the epidemiological data from the Japanese A-bomb Life Span Study (LSS). However, it was also considered important to assess all other types of solid cancer together and the WHO, in their above-mentioned report, stated "No model to calculate the risk for all other solid cancer excluding breast and thyroid cancer risks is available from the LSS data". Applying the LSS models for all solid cancers along with the models for the specific sites means that some cancers have an overlap in the risk evaluations. Thus, calculating the total solid cancer risk plus the breast cancer risk plus the thyroid cancer risk can overestimate the total risk by several per cent. Therefore, the purpose of this paper was to publish the required models for all other solid cancers, i.e. all solid cancers other than those types of cancer requiring special attention after a nuclear accident. The new models presented here have been fitted to the same LSS data set from which the risks provided by the WHO were derived. Although it is known already that the EAR and ERR effect modifications by sex are statistically significant for the outcome "all solid cancer", it is shown here that sex modification is not statistically significant for the outcome "all solid cancer other than thyroid and breast cancer". It is also shown here that the sex-averaged solid cancer risks with and without the sex modification are very similar once breast and thyroid cancers are factored out. Some other notable model differences between those already published for all solid cancers and those presented here for all other solid cancers are also given here. The models presented here can be used to improve on the methodology adopted by WHO after Fukushima and could contribute to emergency preparedness for future nuclear accidents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26732943What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.