Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27487016›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Incidence and Mortality of Solid Cancers in People Exposed In Utero to Ionizing Radiation: Pooled Analyses of Two Cohorts from the Southern Urals, Russia.

Alexander Akleyev, Isabelle Deltour, Lyudmila Krestinina, Mikhail Sokolnikov, Yulia Tsareva, Evgenia Tolstykh, Joachim Schüz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Belarusian in utero cohort: A new opportunity to evaluate the health effects of prenatal and early-life exposure to ionising radiation.Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexander AkleyevUrals Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2583-5808
Isabelle DeltourSection of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon, France.
Lyudmila KrestininaUrals Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation.
Mikhail SokolnikovSouthern Urals Biophysics Institute, Ozyorsk, Russian Federation.
Yulia TsarevaSouthern Urals Biophysics Institute, Ozyorsk, Russian Federation.
Evgenia TolstykhUrals Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation.
Joachim SchüzSection of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon, France.
Centre international de recherche sur le cancer · FRInstitute of Biophysics · RUUrals Research Center for Radiation Medicine · RUChelyabinsk State University · RU

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies have shown that acute external in utero exposure to ionizing radiation can increase cancer risk. It is not known whether chronic exposure at low dose rates, including due to radionuclide intake, influences the lifetime risk of solid cancers in the offspring. The objective of this study was to investigate solid cancer risk after in utero irradiation.

methodsCancer incidence and mortality over a 60-year period (from January 1950 to December 2009) were analyzed in the Urals Prenatally Exposed Cohort (UPEC). The cohort comprised in utero exposed offspring of Mayak Production Association female workers and of female residents of Techa River villages. Some of the offspring also received postnatal exposure, either due to becoming radiation workers themselves or due to continuing to live in the contaminated areas of the Techa River. The mortality analyses comprised 16,821 subjects (601,372 person-years), and the incidence analyses comprised 15,813 subjects (554,411 person-years). Poisson regression was used to quantify the relative risk as a function of the in utero soft tissue dose (with cumulative doses up to 944.9 mGy, mean dose of 14.1 mGy in the pooled cohort) and the postnatal stomach dose for solid cancer incidence and mortality.

resultsWhen a log-linear model was used, relative risk of cancer per 10 mGy of in utero dose was 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96 to 1.01) based on incidence data and 0.98 (CI = 0.94 to 1.01) based on mortality data. Postnatal exposure to ionizing radiation was positively associated with the solid cancer risk in members of the UPEC, with a relative risk of 1.02 per 10mGy CI = 1.00 to 1.04).

conclusionsNo strong evidence was found that chronic low-dose-rate exposure of the embryo and fetus increased the risk of solid cancers in childhood or in adulthood. For both incidence and mortality, a tendency towards a decreased relative risk was noted with increasing doses to soft tissues of the fetus. Further follow-up will provide more precise radiation risk estimates of solid cancer as cohort members are approaching their 60s and cancer becomes more common.

Indexed as

Radiation, IonizingAgedCohort StudiesDose-Response Relationship, RadiationFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedPregnancyPrenatal Exposure Delayed EffectsRussiaSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID27487016
PMCPMC4972315
OpenAlexW2495706180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.