Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27483500›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2017

Residential Exposure to Natural Background Radiation and Risk of Childhood Acute Leukemia in France, 1990-2009.

Claire Demoury, Fabienne Marquant, Géraldine Ielsch, Stéphanie Goujon, Christophe Debayle, Laure Faure, Astrid Coste, Olivier Laurent, Jérôme Guillevic, Dominique Laurier and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. A review of studies of childhood cancer and natural background radiation.International journal of radiation biology · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Epidemiological studies of natural sources of radiation and childhood cancer: current challenges and future perspectives.Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection · 2020
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Studies of radiation health effects inform EPA actions.Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Claire DemouryINSERM, Université Paris-Descartes, Université Sorbonne-Paris-Cité, CRESS-EPICEA Epidémiologie des cancers de l'enfant et de l'adolescent, Paris, France.
Fabienne Marquant
Géraldine Ielsch
Stéphanie Goujon
Christophe Debayle
Laure Faure
Astrid Coste
Olivier Laurent
Jérôme Guillevic
Dominique Laurier
Denis Hémon
Jacqueline Clavel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExposures to high-dose ionizing radiation and high-dose rate ionizing radiation are established risk factors for childhood acute leukemia (AL). The risk of AL following exposure to lower doses due to natural background radiation (NBR) has yet to be conclusively determined.

methodsAL cases diagnosed over 1990-2009 (9,056 cases) were identified and their municipality of residence at diagnosis collected by the National Registry of Childhood Cancers. The Geocap study, which included the 2,763 cases in 2002-2007 and 30,000 population controls, was used for complementary analyses. NBR exposures were modeled on a fine scale (36,326 municipalities) based on measurement campaigns and geological data. The power to detect an association between AL and dose to the red bone marrow (RBM) fitting UNSCEAR (United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation) predictions was 92%, 45% and 99% for exposure to natural gamma radiation, radon and total radiation, respectively.

resultsAL risk, irrespective of subtype and age group, was not associated with the exposure of municipalities to radon or gamma radiation in terms of yearly exposure at age reached, cumulative exposure or RBM dose. There was no confounding effect of census-based socio-demographic indicators, or environmental factors (road traffic, high voltage power lines, vicinity of nuclear plants) related to AL in the Geocap study.

conclusionsOur findings do not support the hypothesis that residential exposure to NBR increases the risk of AL, despite the large size of the study, fine scale exposure estimates and wide range of exposures over France. However, our results at the time of diagnosis do not rule out a slight association with gamma radiation at the time of birth, which would be more in line with the recent findings in the UK and Switzerland.

Indexed as

Background RadiationChildFemaleFranceGamma RaysHousingHumansLeukemia, Radiation-InducedMaleRadiation ExposureRadiation, IonizingRadonRisk AssessmentRadon

Identifiers

PMID27483500
PMCPMC5381982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.