ArticleRadiation research2019
Effect of Heterogeneity in Background Incidence on Inference about the Solid-Cancer Radiation Dose Response in Atomic Bomb Survivors.
Article in Radiation research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Summary of radiation effects on incidence of solid cancers in the Life Span Study of atomic bomb survivors: 1958-2009.Carcinogenesis · 2025Article
- A note on potential gains in precision of radiation risk estimates from joint analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of All Solid Cancer Mortality and Incidence Dose-Response in the Life Span Study of Atomic Bomb Survivors, 1958-2009.Radiation research · 2022Article
- Factors Influencing Background Incidence Rate Calculation: Systematic Empirical Evaluation Across an International Network of Observational Databases.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Lifetime Mortality Risk from Cancer and Circulatory Disease Predicted from the Japanese Atomic Bomb Survivor Life Span Study Data Taking Account of Dose Measurement Error.Radiation research · 2020Article
- High CT doses return to the agenda.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A recent analysis of solid cancer incidence in the Life Span Study of atomic bomb survivors (Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan) found evidence of a nonlinear, upwardly curving radiation dose response among males but not among females. Further analysis of this new and unexpected finding was necessary. We used two approaches to investigate this finding. In one approach, we excluded individual cancer sites or groups of sites from all solid cancers. In the other approach, we used joint analysis to allow for heterogeneity in background-rate parameters across groups of cancers with dissimilar trends in background rates. Exclusion of a few sites led to the disappearance of curvature among males in the remaining collection of solid cancers; some of these influential sites have unique features in their background age-specific incidence that are not captured by a background-rate model fit to all solid cancers combined. Exclusion of a few sites also led to an appearance of curvature among females. Misspecification of background rates can cause bias in inference about the shape of the dose response, so heterogeneity of background rates might explain at least part of the all solid cancer dose-response difference in curvature between males and females. We conclude that analysis based on all solid cancers as a single outcome is not the optimal method to assess radiation risk for solid cancer in the Life Span Study; joint analysis with suitable choices of cancer groups might be preferable by allowing for background-rate heterogeneity across sites while providing greater power to assess radiation risk than analyses of individual sites.
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.