ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2016
Risk of solid cancer in the offspring of female workers of the Mayak nuclear facility in the Southern Urals, Russian Federation.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Health Impacts of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation: Current Scientific Debates and Regulatory Issues.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Studies of cancer risk following in utero exposure to ionizing radiation are limited in number, particularly for adult-onset cancers, and the evidence is unclear. In the present study, the risk of solid cancer incidence following in utero radiation exposure is examined among 8466 offspring of female nuclear workers at one of the largest nuclear facilities (Mayak Production Association) in the Russian Federation. Poisson regression methods were used to estimate excess relative risks (ERRs) per Gray (Gy). Mother's uterine gamma dose served as a surrogate for fetal gamma dose. During 277,002 person-years of follow-up (1948-2009), there were 177 first primary solid cancers excluding non-melanoma skin cancers. Estimated in utero gamma and plutonium doses exceeded zero for 41 and 23 % of offspring, respectively. Of the 177 solid cancers, 66 occurred among individuals with some in utero exposure to gamma radiation and 53 among those with estimated plutonium exposures. There was no indication of a statistically significantly increased risk of solid cancer incidence from in utero gamma exposure (linear ERR/Gy -1.0; upper 95 % confidence limit 0.5). This result was unchanged after accounting for subsequent occupational exposure. Plutonium doses were estimated but were too low to obtain meaningful risk estimates. Thus, in this cohort in utero radiation exposure was not associated with solid cancer risk. This is consistent with an earlier report of mortality in the cohort, but is based on twice as many cases and less susceptible to biases inherent in mortality analyses. Given the relatively young age of the cohort with respect to cancer, continued follow-up should be done as the number of cancer cases increases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.