Conclusions

For the most part, data from medically exposed cohorts support the BEIR VII models. Although there are a few estimates from medical studies that seem incompatible with BEIR VII estimates, the evidence is not sufficiently compelling and consistent to provide a basis for modifying models.

Comparison with Studies of Nuclear Workers Exposed at Low Doses and Low Dose Rates

As discussed in Chapter 8, the most promising studies for direct assessment of risk at low doses and low dose rates are those of nuclear workers who have been monitored for radiation exposure through the use of personal dosimeters. Currently, the most informative risk estimates based on workers are those from a combined analysis of workers in three countries (IARC 1995) and from an analysis of workers in the National Registry of Radiation Workers (NRRW) in the United Kingdom (Muirhead and others 1999). Estimates from these studies are summarized in Table 8-7. Table 12-12 compares worker-based estimates of the ERR/Gy with estimates that form the basis of BEIR VII models. Specifically, the BEIR VII estimates for all solid cancers are based on the ERR mortality model shown in

Table 12-1. The BEIR VII estimates for leukemia are based on the ERR model shown in Table 12-3. Table 12-12 shows estimates of the ERR/Gy for males because workers studies have involved predominantly male exposure. Because the BEIR VII models allow for dependencies on age at exposure, attained age (solid cancer model), and time since exposure (leukemia model), estimates for several values of these variables that might be typical of workers are shown. It would be expected that the average age of exposure for workers would be 30 or more, but BEIR VII values for persons exposed at age 20 are also shown. The average time since exposure for workers is likely to exceed 15 years. The only BEIR VII estimates that are outside the confidence intervals for the worker studies are those for exposure at age 20 and, for leukemia, 5 years after exposure. Although the comparison is not precise, the estimates from the three-country study and the NRRW seem reasonably compatible with BEIR VII models for solid cancer mortality among males, especially when the wide confidence intervals for the worker-based estimates are considered.

SUMMARY

As in past risk assessments, the LSS cohort of survivors of the atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki plays a principal role in developing the committee’s recommended cancer risk estimates. In contrast to previous BEIR reports, data on both cancer mortality and cancer incidence (from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki tumor registries) were available to the BEIR VII committee. This made it possible to give much more detailed attention to cancer incidence (including nonfatal cancers) than in past evaluations. It also made it possible to develop more reliable estimates for site-specific cancers due to the higher-quality diagnostic information compared with that based on death certificates. The cancer incidence data analyzed by the committee included nearly 13,000 cases occurring in the period 1958–1998. In addition, the committee evaluated data on approximately 10,000 cancer deaths occurring in the period 1950–2000, in contrast to fewer than 6000 cancer deaths available to the BEIR V committee. The longer follow-up period and larger number of cancer deaths and cases allowed more precise evaluation of risk and also more reliable assessment of the long-term effects of radiation exposure.

Although the committee did not conduct its own analyses of data from studies other than the LSS, for most studies with suitable data the results of analyses based on models similar to those used by the committee were available and evaluated by the committee. For cancers of the breast and thyroid, several medically exposed groups offer quantitative data suitable for risk assessment, and the committee’s recommended models for these sites are those developed in published combined analyses of data from the relevant studies. For other cancer sites, data suitable for quantitative risk assessment were limited; for example, medical exposures often involve large therapeutic doses.

To use models developed primarily from the LSS cohort to estimate lifetime risks for the U.S. population, it was necessary to make several assumptions. Because of inherent limitations in epidemiologic data and in our understanding of radiation carcinogenesis, these assumptions involve uncertainty. Two of the most important sources of uncertainty are (1) the possible reduction in risk for exposure at low doses and low dose rates (i.e., the DDREF), and (2) the transport of risk estimates based on Japanese atomic bomb survivors to estimate risks for the U.S. population. With regard to the first issue, the committee evaluated both data on solid cancer risks in the LSS cohort and experimental animal data pertinent to this issue. Based on this evaluation, the committee concluded that linear risk estimates obtained from the LSS cohort should be reduced by a factor in the range 1.1 to 2.3 for estimating risks at low doses and low dose rates, and a value of 1.5 was used to estimate solid cancer risks. For estimating the risk of leukemia, the BEIR VII model is linear-quadratic, since this model fitted the data substantially better than the linear model. The use of data on Japanese A-bomb survivors for estimating risks for the U.S. population (transport of risks) is especially problematic for sites where baseline risks differ greatly between the two countries. For cancer sites other than breast and thyroid (where data on Caucasian subjects are available), the committee presents estimates based on the assumption that the excess risk due to radiation is proportional to baseline risks (relative risk transport) and also presents estimates based on the assumption that the excess risk is inde-



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement