Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32506420›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2020

Lung cancer mortality associated with protracted low-dose occupational radiation exposures and smoking behaviors in U.S. radiologic technologists, 1983-2012.

Raquel Velazquez-Kronen, Ethel S Gilbert, Martha S Linet, Kirsten B Moysich, Jo L Freudenheim, Jean Wactawski-Wende, Steven L Simon, Elizabeth K Cahoon, Bruce H Alexander, Michele M Doody and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Raquel Velazquez-KronenRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5744-4866
Ethel S GilbertRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Martha S LinetRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Kirsten B MoysichDepartment of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Jo L FreudenheimDepartment of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Jean Wactawski-WendeDepartment of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Steven L SimonRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Elizabeth K CahoonRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Bruce H AlexanderDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Michele M DoodyRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Cari M KitaharaRadiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
National Institutes of Health · USUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · USRoswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center · USUniversity of Minnesota · 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
Interdisciplinary Training in Cancer Epidemiology at UBR25CA113951 · NCI · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI FREUDENHEIM, JO L., MOYSICH, KIRSTEN B. · 2007 to 2016
$2.5M
Interdisciplinary Training in Cancer Epidemiology at UBT32CA113951 · NCI · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI FREUDENHEIM, JO L., MOYSICH, KIRSTEN B. · 2017 to 2021
$693k
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999NCI NIH HHS R25 CA113951NCI NIH HHS R25CA113951NCI NIH HHS T32 CA113951
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the Japanese atomic bomb survivors, risk of lung cancer has been shown to increase with greater acute exposure to ionizing radiation. Although similar findings have been observed in populations exposed to low-dose, protracted radiation, such studies lack information on cigarette smoking history, a potential confounder. In a cohort of 106 068 U.S. radiologic technologists, we examined the association between estimated cumulative lung absorbed dose from occupational radiation exposure and lung cancer mortality. Poisson regression models, adjusted for attained age, sex, birth cohort, pack-years smoked and years since quitting smoking, were used to calculate linear excess relative risks (ERR) per 100 mGy, using time-dependent cumulative lung absorbed dose, lagged 10 years. Mean cumulative absorbed dose to the lung was 25 mGy (range: 0-810 mGy). During the 1983 to 2012 follow-up, 1090 participants died from lung cancer. Greater occupational radiation lung dose was not associated with lung cancer mortality overall (ERR per 100 mGy: -0.02, 95% CI: <0-0.13). However, significant dose-response relationships were observed for some subgroups, which might be false-positive results given the number of statistical tests performed. As observed in other studies of radiation and smoking, the interaction between radiation and smoking appeared to be sub-multiplicative with an ERR per 100 mGy of 0.41 (95% CI: 0.01-1.15) for those who smoked <20 pack-years and -0.03 (95% CI: <0-0.15) for those who smoked ≥20 pack-years. Our study provides some evidence that greater protracted radiation exposure in the low-dose range is positively associated with lung cancer mortality.

Indexed as

Technology, RadiologicCigarette SmokingCohort StudiesConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicFemaleHumansIncidenceLung NeoplasmsMaleNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedOccupational ExposureRadiation ExposureSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Statescigarette smokingionizing radiationlung neoplasmsoccupational exposureprospective studiesradiation exposurerisk assessmentsurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID32506420
PMCPMC8281365
OpenAlexW3033537436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.