Cancer Risks near Nuclear Facilities: The Importance of Research Design and Explicit Study Hypotheses

BackgroundIn April 2010, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission asked the National Academy of Sciences to update a 1990 study of cancer risks near nuclear facilities. Prior research on this topic has suffered from problems in hypothesis formulation and research design.ObjectivesWe review epidemiologic principles used in studies of generic exposure–response associations and in studies of specific sources of exposure. We then describe logical problems with assumptions, formation of testable hypotheses, and interpretation of evidence in previous research on cancer risks near nuclear facilities.DiscussionAdvancement of knowledge about cancer risks near nuclear facilities depends on testing specific hypotheses grounded in physical and biological mechanisms of exposure and susceptibility while considering sample size and ability to adequately quantify exposure, ascertain cancer cases, and evaluate plausible confounders.ConclusionsNext steps in advancing knowledge about cancer risks near nuclear facilities require studies of childhood cancer incidence, focus on in utero and early childhood exposures, use of specific geographic information, and consideration of pathways for transport and uptake of radionuclides. Studies of cancer mortality among adults, cancers with long latencies, large geographic zones, and populations that reside at large distances from nuclear facilities are better suited for public relations than for scientific purposes

The Dose Window for Radiation-Induced Protective Adaptive Responses

Adaptive responses to low doses of low LET radiation occur in all organisms thus far examined, from single cell lower eukaryotes to mammals. These responses reduce the deleterious consequences of DNA damaging events, including radiation-induced or spontaneous cancer and non-cancer diseases in mice. The adaptive response in mammalian cells and mammals operates within a certain window that can be defined by upper and lower dose thresholds, typically between about 1 and 100 mGy for a single low dose rate exposure. However, these thresholds for protection are not a fixed function of total dose, but also vary with dose rate, additional radiation or non-radiation stressors, tissue type and p53 functional status. Exposures above the upper threshold are generally detrimental, while exposures below the lower threshold may or may not increase either cancer or non-cancer disease risk

CT Radiation Dose Optimization and Estimation: an Update for Radiologists

In keeping with the increasing utilization of CT examinations, the greater concern about radiation hazards from examinations has been addressed. In this regard, CT radiation dose optimization has been given a great deal of attention by radiologists, referring physicians, technologists, and physicists. Dose-saving strategies are continuously evolving in terms of imaging techniques as well as dose management. Consequently, regular updates of this issue are necessary especially for radiologists who play a pivotal role in this activity. This review article will provide an update on how we can optimize CT dose in order to maximize the benefit-to-risk ratio of this clinically useful diagnostic imaging method