Radiation effects on cancer risks in atomic bomb survivors Chelyabinsk October 2, 2012 Dale L. Preston Hirosoft International Eureka, CA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
7. RADIATION AND RADIATION PROTECTION
Advertisements

Ultrasonography survey and thyroid cancer in Fukushima Prefecture Peter Jacob, Alexander Ulanovsky, Christian Kaiser Department of Radiation Sciences Institute.
EPA Radiogenic Cancer Risk Projections for the U.S. Population Michael Boyd Radiation Protection Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2011 OAS.
ATLAS Steering Committee: 24 September 2005 Steering Committee meeting, 24 th September 2005 University of Oxford Examination Schools.
CONCEPTS UNDERLYING STUDY DESIGN
Radiation Carcinogenesis Martin Brown. Two types of late effects of irradiation Deterministic (non-stochastic) effects –Severity increases with dose.
Aarhus and the A-Bomb Survivor Studies Donald A. Pierce RERF Hiroshima.
Nuclear Weapons: The Final Pandemic Preventing Proliferation and Achieving Abolition Changing views of the biological effects of low-level ionizing radiation.
Childhood Thyroid Cancer in Russia Following the Chernobyl accident V.K. Ivanov Chairman, Russian Scientific Commission on Radiological Protection Medical.
Ahmed Group Lecture 27 Hereditary Effects of Radiation Lecture 27.
Journal Club Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Health: Current Evidence January–February 2009.
1 Journal Club Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Health: Current Evidence July–August 2011.
BEIR VII: “The very error of the moon.” Othello, Act II Herbert L. Abrams.
Donald A. Pierce Radiation Effects Research Foundation, Hiroshima (retired) Radiation-related cancer incidence and non-cancer mortality among A-bomb survivors.
Journal Club Alcohol and Health: Current Evidence May-June 2006.
Guidance for Industry Establishing Pregnancy Registries Pregnancy Registry Working Group Pregnancy Labeling Taskforce March, 2000 Evelyn M. Rodriguez M.D.,
Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation Stochastic Somatic Effects Radiation induction of cancer Lecture IAEA Post Graduate Educational Course Radiation.
COHORT STUDIES Nigel Paneth. TYPES OF COHORT STUDIES A. TIMING B. SAMPLING C. POPULATION BASE D. OPEN AND CLOSED COHORTS.
Manish Chaudhary BPH, MPH
Principles of Epidemiology Lecture 9 Dona Schneider, PhD, MPH, FACE
COHORT STUDY DR. A.A.TRIVEDI (M.D., D.I.H.) ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
SAIC.com © SAIC. All rights reserved. 1 Fallout Deposition In Hiroshima Where Gamma-Ray Thermoluminescence Measurements Exceed the Dosimetry System (DS02)
WHICH ONE DOESN’T FIT? THAT’S MORE LIKE IT.. RADIATION DOSAGE CXR= 1/100 Background Radiation Background Radiation/yr Sea level = 3 milli Sieverts 100.
International Workshop on Radiation and Thyroid Cancer Summary/Conclusions and Recommendations – Day 3 From RERF LSS: Excess relative risk goes down with.
Thyroid Disease among A-bomb Survivors Exposed in Childhood Roy Shore, Kyoji Furukawa, Misa Imaizumi Radiation Effects Research Foundation
STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology
Cohort Study.
7 Regression & Correlation: Rates Basic Medical Statistics Course October 2010 W. Heemsbergen.
ATSDR’s approach to site assessment and epidemiologic considerations for multisite studies Steve Dearwent, PhD, MPH Chief, Health Investigations Branch.
Epidemiology The Basics Only… Adapted with permission from a class presentation developed by Dr. Charles Lynch – University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Kjell Hansson Mild There has been much debate in the media if young persons might be more sensitive to microwave emissions from cellular phones than older.
Retrospective Cohort Study. Review- Retrospective Cohort Study Retrospective cohort study: Investigator has access to exposure data on a group of people.
1 Institute of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Kyiv, Ukraine 2 U.S. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, U.S.A 3 Scientific Centre for Radiation Medicine,
Deconstructing Linearity Kenneth L. Mossman Professor of Health Physics Director, Office of Radiation Safety Arizona State University Tempe, AZ.
An Application of Generalized Multiple Indicators, Multiple Causes Measurement Error Models to Adjust for Dose Error in RERF Data Carmen D. Tekwe Department.
Joint Effects of Radiation and Smoking on Lung Cancer Risk among Atomic Bomb Survivors Donald A. Pierce, RERF Gerald B. Sharp, RERF & NIAID Kiyohiko Mabuchi,
Radiation Health Effects
ANALYTICAL X-RAY SAFETY User Training Centre for Environmental Health, Safety and Security Management.
Epidemiological Study designs
Role of Statisticians in Follow-Up of A-Bomb Survivors Donald A. Pierce Oregon Health & Sciences Univ. Retired from Radiation Effects Res. Fndn. Slides.
Recent Research Results from the Russian Health Studies Program Barrett N. Fountos, M.S. Program Manager U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety.
Birth Weight and Childhood Cancer and Leukemia Update from the I4C Environmental Working Group on Birth Weight and Childhood Cancer Ora Paltiel, Hadassah-Hebrew.
S. Mazloomzadeh MD, PhD COHORT STUDIES Learning Objectives To develop an understanding of: - What is a cohort study? - What types of cohort studies are.
Risk Assessment of Radiation-Induced Thyroid Cancer in Population of Belarus M.V.Malko Institute of Power National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Minsk,
Leicester Warwick Medical School Health and Disease in Populations Cohort Studies Paul Burton.
Instructor Resource Chapter 15 Copyright © Scott B. Patten, Permission granted for classroom use with Epidemiology for Canadian Students: Principles,
COHORT STUDY COHORT A group of people who share a common characteristic or experience within a defined period of time. e.g. age, occupation, exposure.
CHP400: Community Health Program - lI Research Methodology STUDY DESIGNS Observational / Analytical Studies Cohort Study Present: Disease Past: Exposure.
 Pilot Survey: For non-radiation Risk Factors Faith Davis, Ludmilla Krestinina, Oleg Kalyov, Dale Preston, Alexander Akleyev, Timothy Johnson (JCCRER.
Physical activity of baby boomers compared to older and younger generations in Canada: An age-period-cohort analysis Mayilee Canizares, Elizabeth Badley,
Matching. Objectives Discuss methods of matching Discuss advantages and disadvantages of matching Discuss applications of matching Confounding residual.
Pagwash Conference Nagasaki 2015 Plenary Session I Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons: Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons: Life-long Health Effects.
CT Screening for Lung Cancer vs. Smoking Cessation: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Pamela M. McMahon, PhD; Chung Yin Kong, PhD; Bruce E. Johnson; Milton.
Dale L. Preston Hirosoft International Eureka, CA Cancer Risks Following Low Dose Radiation Exposures: Lessons from Epi Studies The Accidents at Fukushima.
Case control & cohort studies
Date of download: 6/27/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Radiation Dose-Response Relationships for Thyroid.
Measures of disease frequency Simon Thornley. Measures of Effect and Disease Frequency Aims – To define and describe the uses of common epidemiological.
DRPH/SRBE/LEPID Results of epidemiological studies Contribution from occupationally exposed populations to quantification of risk at low doses Margot Tirmarche.
The accidents at Fukushima Dai-Ichi Summary of Health Discussions
Figure 2. Dose distribution function for thyroid cancer cases and for healthy members of the cohort for adults (18 y of age and older at the time of the.
Comparison of three Observational Analytical strategies
Biological Effects of Radiation.
ACIP Feb , 2007 Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) Among Recipients of Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine (MCV4,Menactra®) Update Oct Jan Robert.
BEIR VII: Update on the risks of “low-level” radiation
Review – First Exam Chapters 1 through 5
Daniel Stram; University of Southern California
NYU School of Medicine (Retired)
U.S. Department of Energy
EPA Perspectives on Risk Projections for Low Dose and Dose Rate Exposures David Pawel, Ph.D. Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (EPA) American Nuclear.
Thank you, Dr Greek. Good morning everyone
Presentation transcript:

Radiation effects on cancer risks in atomic bomb survivors Chelyabinsk October 2, 2012 Dale L. Preston Hirosoft International Eureka, CA

2 Outline Historical background of atomic bomb survivor studies background Outline of major survivor cohorts Dosimetry Solid cancer risk estimates Leukemia risk estimates (Informal) comparison of survivor and Techa River cohort risks

3 A-bomb Survivor Studies Atomicbombings NationalCensus CohortsEstablished Tumor Registries ABCC Studies Cancer Incidence Study (LSS) Clinical Study (AHS) Mortality Study (LSS) FrancisComm. T65D RERFcreated DS86 Blue Ribbon Comm. F1 Mortality Study DS02 F1 Clinical Study (FOCS) Joint Comm Joint Comm.

4 Early Studies Genetic effects (malformations, premature birth, sex-rati o) –72,000 registered pregnancies –No apparent radiation effects Leukemia –Initial reports from Japanese physicians in late 1940’s –First published report in 1952 –Initial crude risk estimates in 1956 (not from ABCC) Solid Cancer –First studies in late 1950’s and early 1960’s –Some indication of effects Hampered by crude dose estimates and limitations of statistical methods

5 Saving the Survivor Studies Calls for end to ABCC studies in early 1950’s –Major genetic studies were completed with no compelling evidence of hereditary effects –Leukemia excess risk appeared to be declining –Studies being carried out in ad-hoc manner –Costs for program rising –Staff morale low

6 Saving the Survivor Studies US National Academies of Science organized committee to assess what should be done about ABCC research Recommendations –Reorganized program should continue –Unified study plan Focus on fixed cohorts of survivors and their children with internal comparison groups Mortality follow-up Pathology (autopsy) program Clinical studies Highlighted need for dose estimates

7 ABCC/RERF Cohorts Life Span Study (LSS) A-bomb Survivors 284,000 Master Sample 195, 000 Life Span Study 121, Census Adult Health Study 22,000 Original LSS includes groups of non-military Japanese for whom follow- up data could readily be obtained: 1)All survivors' < 2 km with acute effects 2)Matched group of other survivors < 2 km 3)Matched group of people who were km 4)Matched group of unexposed (not-in-city) individuals

8 ABCC/RERF - F1 study cohorts F1 Mortality 80,000 Untoward pregnancy outcomes 77,000 Biochemical Genetic studies 28,000 FOCS 25,000 selected, 12,000 examined Born between May 1946 and December 1984 Bornbetween 1947 and 1953 Born between 1947 and 1953

9 ABCC-RERF cohorts In-utero cohort Pooled IU cohort 3,638 people Pooled cohort combines overlapping clinical (1,606 members) and mortality (2,802 members) cohorts. Mortality and cancer incidence data are available for all members of the cohort.

10 ABCC/RERF Follow-up Programs Mortality –Based on mandatory nation-wide family registration –Updated on a three-year cycle Cancer incidence –Hiroshima & Nagasaki tumor registries (1958 – present) –ABCC pathology program 1958 – 1972 –Hiroshima & Nagasaki tissue registries present Leukemia and related disorders –Leukemia registry 1950 – 1987 –Hiroshima & Nagasaki Tumor Registries 1958 – present Clinical Examinations –Biennial exams –70-80% participation through 25 AHS exam cycles –Adapted for use in F1 clinical study (FOCS) Mail Surveys –1965 (Ni-hon-san study men), 1968 (women), 1978, 1991, 201?

11 Dosimetry Location –Specified as coordinates on fairly crude US army maps Sought corroboration of location Recorded to nearest 10m in each coordinate if detailed shielding history obtained and nearest 100m for others External Shielding –Crude shielding category information available on virtually all people of interest –Detailed shielding histories for most survivors within 1.6km in Hiroshima and 2 km in Nagasaki Self shielding (organ dose) –Available for survivors with detailed shielding histories

12 Evolving Dosimetry Distance and occurrence of acute effects “Air dose” curves with crude shielding adjustments (T57D) Gamma and neutron air kerma equations with external shielding models (T65D) –Based on weapons tests with limited validation from measurements (TLD and Co 60 activation) Monte-Carlo transport codes for transport and shielding including organ doses (DS86) –More physical measurements Updated transport and shielding models (DS02) –Extensive validation efforts especially for neutrons

13  Hypocenter Dose (mSv) ● < 5 ● 5 – 100 ● 100 – 200 ● ● 500 – 1000 ● ▲ unknown * LSS: Life Span Study Cohort LSS Survivors within 3 Km Hiroshima Nagasaki

14 Describing Excess Risks Baseline (zero dose) risk function a age at risk; s gender; and b birth cohort Dose-response shape, e.g. linear, linear-quadratic, threshold, … Effect modification function e age at exposure Excess relative risk (ERR) model Excess absolute rate (EAR) model

15 LSS Solid Cancer Incidence Information on gender and age-time patterns depends (only) on radiation-associated (“excess”) cases Excess cases not explicitly identified Number of relevant cases is relatively small, especially for specific sites * Attributable risk % for people with doses > Gy

LSS Solid Cancer Incidence Dose Response Linear ERR/Gy 0 – 2 Gy 0.49 No evidence of non-linearity (LQ model on 0 – 2 Gy) P > 0.5 Curvature 0.12 LSS-LDEF Using RERF public dataset lssinc07.csv ( Proximal zero dose baseline (adjusted for distal and NIC)

LSS Solid Cancer Incidence Dose Response 0 – 0.5 Gy Linear ERR/Gy 0 – 2 Gy – 0.1 Gy – 0.15 Gy 0.51 Test for trend 0 – 0.1 Gy P = – 0.15 Gy P = Using RERF public dataset lssinc07.csv ( Proximal zero dose baseline (adjusted for distal and NIC)

18 LSS Solid Cancer Excess Relative Risk Temporal Patterns Age at exposure -29% per decade (90% CI -39%; -18%) Attained age Age -0.9 (90% CI -1.5; -0.2) Gender * M: 0.29 (90% CI 0.21; 0.39) F: 0.58 (90% CI 0.42; 0.68) F:M:1.9 (90% CI 1.4; 2.7) * ERR per Sv at age 70 following exposure at age 30

19 LSS Solid Cancer Excess Rate Temporal Patterns Age at exposure -20% per decade (90% CI -30%; -10%) Attained age Age 3.5 (90% CI 2.9; 4.1) Gender * M: 26 (90% CI 18; 34) F: 28 (90% CI 23; 34) F:M: 1.1 (90% CI 0.8; 1.6) * Excess cases per PY at age 70 following exposure at age 30

Leukemia Incidence CLL is much less common in Japan than in Russia (or other countries) ATL cases mostly in Nagasaki with no indication of a dose response

LSS Leukemia Incidence 21 Almost half of cases among exposed associated with exposure

Leukemia Incidence Significant non-linearity in dose response Low dose risks about half of linear model estimates 22

Leukemia Incidence Temporal Patterns 23 ERR model with age and age at exposure dependence describes data as well as EAR model EAR model with only attained age effect fits better than age at exposure and time since exposure model from 1994 (gray curves)

Informal Comparison of LSS and Techa River Risks Solid cancer –ERR risk estimates similar around age 60 –Temporal patterns not significant in TRC but estimates exhibit somewhat different patterns than in LSS (increasing with attained age or age at exposure) –TRC has very limited power to detect effect modifications Leukemia –ERR risk estimates for non-CLL similar with similar temporal patterns 24

25 Summary and Conclusions Accumulating data and modern analytical methods make it possible to investigate radiation effect modification in some detail Data are limited even in the largest cohort –Especially true when examining a site-specific risks and modeling interactions Both ERR and EAR descriptions provide equally important and complementary information –Attained age is an important factor in both –Generalization of age at exposure and gender effects can be difficult Pooled analyses may be useful in looking at effect modification –But LSS results may dominate such comparisons

26 Acknowledgments We stand on the shoulders of giants Gil Beebe, Seymour Jablon, Jim Neel, Jack Schull ABCC/RERF scientists and staff who made the ideas a reality George Darling, Howard Hamilton, Tetsuo Imada, Hiroo Kato, M. Kanemitsu, Bob Miller, Kenji Omae, Itsuzo Shigematsu and hundreds more Collaborators Japan Akio Awa, Harry Cullings, Saeko Fujiwara, Shochiro Fujita, Sachiyo Funamoto, Kyoji Furukawa, Kazunori Kodama, Charles Land, Kiyo Mabuchi, Nori Nakamura, Don Pierce, Elaine Ron, Yukiko Shimizu, Michiko Yamada URCRM / NCI / JCCRER Lyudimila Krestinina, Marina Degteva, Alexander Akleyev, Sara Schonfeld, Elaine Ron, Faye Davis