Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27623235›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2016

Breast cancer risk and protracted low-to-moderate dose occupational radiation exposure in the US Radiologic Technologists Cohort, 1983-2008.

D L Preston, C M Kitahara, D M Freedman, A J Sigurdson, S L Simon, M P Little, E K Cahoon, P Rajaraman, J S Miller, B H Alexander and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00410475 (Cancer Risk in X-Ray Technologists), which is not on this map. Cited by 54 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT00410475 completednot on this map

Cancer Risk in X-Ray Technologists

TypeobservationalSponsorNational Cancer Institute (NCI)Ran1997 to 2020Enrolled146,022ConditionsRadiation-Induced Neoplasms, Breast+Neoplasm+Radiation+Etiology, Thyroid+Neoplasm+Radiation+Etiology
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. ALARA+: Summit on Radiation and Orthopedic Risks in Fluoroscopic Laboratories.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.

D L PrestonHirosoft International, 1335 H, Eureka, CA 95501, USA.
C M KitaharaRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
D M FreedmanRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
A J SigurdsonRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
S L SimonRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
M P LittleRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
E K CahoonRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
P RajaramanRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
J S MillerInformation Management Services Inc., 6110 Executive Boulevard No. 310, Rockville, MD 20852, USA.
B H AlexanderDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 426 Church Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
M M DoodyRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
M S LinetRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Division of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsNational Cancer Institute · USInformation Management Services · USISCO International (United States) · USMinnesota Department of Health · US

Funding

Studies of Populations Exposed to Occupational Sources of RadiationZIACP010133 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI KITAHARA, CARI · 2009 to 2025
$34.2M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough high-dose ionising radiation is associated with increased breast cancer risks, the association with protracted low-dose-rate exposures remains unclear. The US Radiologic Technologist study provides an opportunity to examine the association between low-to-moderate dose radiation and breast cancer incidence and mortality.

methodsOne thousand nine hundred and twenty-two self-reported first primary cancers were diagnosed during 1983-2005 among 66 915 female technologists, and 586 breast cancer deaths occurred during 1983-2008 among 83 538 female cohort members. Occupational breast dose estimates were based on work histories, historical data, and, after the mid-1970s, individual film badge measurements. Excess relative risks were estimated using Poisson regression with birth cohort stratification and adjustment for menopause, reproductive history, and other risk factors.

resultsHigher doses were associated with increased breast cancer incidence, with an excess relative risk at 100 mGy of 0.07 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.005 to 0.19). Associations were strongest for technologists born before 1930 (excess relative risk at 100 mGy=0.16; 95% CI: 0.03-0.39) with similar patterns for mortality among technologists born before 1930.

conclusionsOccupational radiation to the breast was positively associated with breast cancer risk. The risk was more pronounced for women born before 1930 who began working before 1950 when mean annual doses (37 mGy) were considerably higher than in later years (1.3 mGy). However, because of the uncertainties and possible systematic errors in the occupational dose estimates before 1960, these findings should be treated with caution.

Indexed as

Radiation DosageRadiation OncologyAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIncidenceMedical Laboratory PersonnelNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedOccupational ExposureRadiation, IonizingRadiologistsRisk FactorsUnited StatesWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID27623235
PMCPMC5117787
OpenAlexW2518840052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

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.