ArticleCarcinogenesis2025
Symposium report-ethical and social considerations regarding return of secondary findings in atomic bomb survivors.
Article in Carcinogenesis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overview and future studies of potential hereditary effects of parental exposure to atomic bomb radiation on their offspring.Carcinogenesis · 2025Review
- Eighty years of cancer research after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.Carcinogenesis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) conducts research on the health effects of atomic bomb (A-bomb) radiation, supported by the long-term cooperation of survivors and their children. In response to concerns from A-bomb survivors, their offspring, and the global community, RERF has investigated transgenerational radiation effects for many years. Currently, RERF is planning the Trio Genome Study (TGS), which will utilize advanced genome sequencing to examine potential genetic effects on the offspring of survivors. This study could yield significant findings but also presents ethical challenges, particularly in ensuring that results are returned responsibly to the community. RERF first held an international workshop to address ethical, legal, and social issues related to genomic analysis in 2020, followed by formation of stakeholder committees to align the study with community perspectives. Most recently, in December 2024, an international symposium further explored frameworks important to the TGS, including risk communication, benefit-sharing, community involvement, and return of secondary findings. In genomic analysis, secondary findings comprise a deliberate search for pathogenic variants in an established list of genes in disorders associated with life-threatening manifestations. Returning these secondary findings to research participants is crucial from the perspective of benefit-sharing. Discussions emphasized the need for transparency in the return of secondary findings, especially those with actionable health implications, including sharing the rationale behind providing information about genetic variants to research participants. These frameworks will guide not only future RERF studies but also genomic research worldwide, ensuring that the findings benefit participants and communities.
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.