Studies of the mortality of A-bomb survivors. 9. Mortality, 1950-1985: Part 3. Noncancer mortality based on the revised doses (DS86).

Deaths in the RERF Life Span Study (LSS) sample have been determined for the years 1950-1985 and an analysis of cancer mortality with the revised DS86 doses has been described separately. In this report, we examine the relationship to dose of deaths from all diseases other than cancer. Although the evidence is still limited, there seems to be an excess risk from noncancer death at high doses (2 or 3 Gy and over). Statistically, a pure quadratic or a linear-threshold model [the estimated threshold dose is 1.4 Gy (0.6-2.8 Gy)] is found to fit better than a simple linear or linear-quadratic model. This increase in noncancer mortality is statistically demonstrable, generally, after 1965 and among the younger survivors (less than 40 at the time of the bombing), suggesting a sensitivity for this age group. For specific causes of death, an excess in relative risk at the high dose level, that is, 2 Gy or more, is seen in circulatory and digestive diseases. The relative risk is, however, much smaller than that for cancer. These findings, based as they are on death certificates, have their limitations. Most significant, perhaps, is the possible erroneous attribution of radiation-related cancer deaths to other causes. At present, the contribution such errors may make to the apparent increase in non-cancer deaths at the higher doses cannot be estimated as rigorously as is obviously desirable. However, even now, this increase does not appear to be fully explicable in terms of errors in classification. Further follow-up of mortality in this LSS cohort as well as disease revealed by the biennial physical examinations of the morbidity subsample (Adult Health Study) of the LSS cohort will be needed to confirm this suggestion of a radiation-related increase in mortality from causes other than cancer, and to determine whether it results in a demonstrable life shortening among the heavily exposed A-bomb survivors.     

Effect of radiation exposure on survival after first solid cancer diagnosis in A-bomb survivors

BackgroundComparison of the estimated effect of atomic bomb radiation exposure on solid cancer incidence and solid cancer mortality in the RERF Life Span Study (LSS) reveals a difference in the magnitude and shape of the excess relative risk dose response. A possible contributing factor to this difference is pre-diagnosis radiation effect on post-diagnosis survival. Pre-diagnosis radiation exposure theoretically could influence post-diagnosis survival by affecting the genetic makeup and possibly aggressiveness of cancer, or by compromising tolerance for aggressive treatment for cancer.MethodsWe analyze the radiation effect on post-diagnosis survival in 20,463 LSS subjects diagnosed with first-primary solid cancer between 1958 and 2009 with particular attention to whether death was caused by the first-primary cancer, other cancer, or non-cancer diseases.ResultsFrom multivariable Cox regression analysis of cause-specific survival, the excess hazard at 1 Gy (EH_1Gy) for death from the first primary cancer was not significantly different from zero – p = 0.23, EH_1Gy = 0.038 (95 % CI: −0.023, 0.104). Death from other cancer and death from non-cancer diseases both were significantly associated with radiation dose: other cancer EH_1Gy = 0.38 (95 % CI: 0.24, 0.53); non-cancer EH_1Gy = 0.24 (95 % CI: 0.13, 0.36), both p < 0.001.ConclusionThere is no detectable large effect of pre-diagnosis radiation exposure on post-diagnosis death from the first primary cancer in A-bomb survivors.ImpactA direct effect of pre-diagnosis radiation exposure on cancer prognosis is ruled out as an explanation for the difference in incidence and mortality dose response in A-bomb survivors.     

Improved estimates of cancer site-specific risks for A-bomb survivors

Pawel, D. J., Preston, D. L., Pierce, D. A. and Cologne, J. B. Improved Estimates of Cancer Site-Specific Risks for A-Bomb Survivors. Radiat. Res. 169, 87-98 (2008). Simple methods are investigated for improving summary site-specific radiogenic risk estimates. Estimates in this report are derived from cancer incidence data from the Life Span Study (LSS) cohort of A-bomb survivors that are followed up by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF). Estimates from the LSS of excess relative risk (ERR) for solid cancer sites have typically been derived separately for each site. Even though the data for this are extensive, the statistical imprecision in site-specific (organ-specific) risk estimates is substantial, and it is clear that a large portion of the site-specific variation in estimates is due to this imprecision. Empirical Bayes (EB) estimates offer a reasonable approach for moderating this variation. The simple version of EB estimates that we applied to the LSS data are weighted averages of a pooled overall estimate of ERR and separately derived site-specific estimates, with weights determined by the data. Results indicate that the EB estimates are most useful for sites such as esophageal or bladder cancer, for which the separately derived ERR estimates are less precise than for other sites.     

Updates to astronaut radiation limits: radiation risks for never-smokers

New epidemiology assessments of the life span study (LSS) of the atomic bomb survivors in Japan and of other exposed cohorts have been made by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the United Nations Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, and the Radiation Research Effects Foundation in Japan. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) uses a 3% risk of exposure-induced death (REID) as a basis for setting age- and gender-specific dose limits for astronauts. NASA's dose limits originate from the report of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) in the year 2000 based on analysis of older epidemiology data. We compared the results of the recent analysis of the LSS to the earlier risk projections from the NCRP. Using tissue-specific, incidence-based risk transfer from the LSS data to a U.S. population to project REID values leads to higher risk and reduced dose limits for older astronauts (>40 years) compared to earlier models that were based on mortality risk transfer. Because astronauts and many other individuals should be considered as healthy workers, including never-smokers free of lifetime use of tobacco, we considered possible variations in risks and dose limits that would occur due to the reference population used for estimates. After adjusting cancer rates to remove smoking effects, radiation risks for lung and total cancer were estimated using a mixture model, with equal weights for additive and multiplicative transfer, to be 20% and 30% lower for males and females, respectively, for never-smokers compared to the average U.S. population. We recommend age- and gender-specific dose limits based on incidence-based risk transfer for never-smokers that could be used by NASA. Our analysis illustrates that gaining knowledge to improve transfer models, which entail knowledge of cancer initiation and promotion effects, could significantly reduce uncertainties in risk projections.     

Accuracy of industry and occupation on death certificates of electric utility workers: implications for epidemiologic studies of magnetic fields and cancer

A substantial epidemiologic literature has relied on occupation and industry information from death certificates to make inferences about the association of electric and magnetic field exposure with cancer, but the validity of the occupational data on death certificates is questionable. We compared occupation and industry information from death certificates to company work histories for 793 electric utility workers who died from brain cancer (n=143), leukemia (n=156), lung cancer (n=246, randomly sampled), and non-cancer causes (n=248, randomly sampled). Nearly 75% of death certificates correctly indicated utility industry employment and of those, 48% matched the longest held occupation derived from company work histories. Hence, only 36% matched on both industry and occupation. We computed odds ratios relating occupations involving magnetic field exposure to brain cancer and leukemia both for the occupation listed on the death certificate and for the longest-held occupation based on company records in order to examine the impact of exposure misclassification based on reliance on the death certificate information. For brain cancer, the odds ratio was 1.2 based on death certificates and 1.7 based on company work history, suggesting some attenuation due to misclassification. For leukemia, death certificate information yielded an odds ratio of 0.9, whereas company work histories yielded an odds ratio of 1.3. Although work histories are limited to the period of employment in a specific company, these data suggest that there is substantial misclassification in use of death certificate information on industry and occupation of utility workers, as found in other industries. The limited quality of occupation and industry information on death certificates argues against relying on such information to evaluate modest associations with mortality.     

Seasonal Variation of Overall and Cardiovascular Mortality: A Study in 19 Countries from Different Geographic Locations

Background

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) mortality has been shown to follow a seasonal pattern. Several studies suggested several possible determinants of this pattern, including misclassification of causes of deaths. We aimed at assessing seasonality in overall, CVD, cancer and non-CVD/non-cancer mortality using data from 19 countries from different latitudes.

Methods and Findings

Monthly mortality data were compiled from 19 countries, amounting to over 54 million deaths. We calculated ratios of the observed to the expected numbers of deaths in the absence of a seasonal pattern. Seasonal variation (peak to nadir difference) for overall and cause-specific (CVD, cancer or non-CVD/non-cancer) mortality was analyzed using the cosinor function model. Mortality from overall, CVD and non-CVD/non-cancer showed a consistent seasonal pattern. In both hemispheres, the number of deaths was higher than expected in winter. In countries close to the Equator the seasonal pattern was considerably lower for mortality from any cause. For CVD mortality, the peak to nadir differences ranged from 0.185 to 0.466 in the Northern Hemisphere, from 0.087 to 0.108 near the Equator, and from 0.219 to 0.409 in the Southern Hemisphere. For cancer mortality, the seasonal variation was nonexistent in most countries.

Conclusions

In countries with seasonal variation, mortality from overall, CVD and non-CVD/non-cancer show a seasonal pattern with mortality being higher in winter than in summer. Conversely, cancer mortality shows no substantial seasonality.     

Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, part II. Noncancer mortality: 1950-1990.

This report updates the data on noncancer mortality for 86,572 atomic bomb survivors with dose estimates in the Radiation Effects Research Foundation's Life Span Study cohort. The primary analyses are based on more than 27,000 noncancer disease deaths that occurred in the cohort between October 1, 1950, and December 31, 1990, 30% more than in the previous report. The present analyses strengthen earlier findings of a statistically significant increase in noncancer disease death rates with radiation dose. Increasing trends are observed for diseases of the circulatory, digestive and respiratory systems. Rates for those exposed to 1 Sv are elevated about 10%, a relative increase that is considerably smaller than that for cancer. However, estimates of the number of radiation-related noncancer deaths in the cohort to date (140 to 280) are 50 to 100% of the number for solid cancer. The data do not yet clarify the shape of the dose response. There is no significant evidence against linearity, but the data are statistically consistent with curvilinear dose-response functions that posit essentially zero risk for doses below 0.5 Sv. Similarly, while the data are consistent with substantial variation in the excess relative risk with age at exposure or attained age, there is no statistically significant dependence on these factors. In view of the small relative risks and the lack of understanding of biological mechanisms, we emphasize consideration of whether the findings could be explained by misclassification, confounding or selection effects. Based on available data, we conclude that such factors are unlikely to fully explain the observed dose response. A significant dose response is also seen for deaths from blood diseases with an excess relative risk that is several times greater than that seen for solid cancer. Particular attention is paid to the possibility that this apparent effect is a consequence of the attribution of leukemia or other cancer deaths to noncancer blood diseases. We find that misclassification does not explain this excess risk. As in earlier reports, suicide rates tend to decrease with increasing dose.     

Allowance for random dose estimation errors in atomic bomb survivor studies: a revision

Allowing for imprecision of radiation dose estimates for A-bomb survivors followed up by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation can be improved through recent statistical methodology. Since the entire RERF dosimetry system has recently been revised, it is timely to reconsider this. We have found that the dosimetry revision itself does not warrant changes in these methods but that the new methodology does. In addition to assumptions regarding the form and magnitude of dose estimation errors, previous and current methods involve the apparent distribution of true doses in the cohort. New formulas give results conveniently and explicitly in terms of these inputs. Further, it is now possible to use assumptions about two components of the dose errors, referred to in the statistical literature as "classical" and "Berkson-type". There are indirect statistical indications, involving non-cancer biological effects, that errors may be somewhat larger than assumed before, in line with recommendations made here. Inevitably, methods must rely on uncertain assumptions about the magnitude of dose errors, and it is comforting to find that, within the range of plausibility, eventual cancer risk estimates are not very sensitive to these.     

Improving the reporting of cancer-specific mortality and survival in research using cancer registry data

Population-based registries are increasingly used in cancer research. In such studies, cancer-specific mortality or survival is frequently used as the primary outcome. To determine whether a putative cancer was part of the causal chain of events leading to death, cancer registries primarily rely on death certificates. Hence, they depend on the subjective interpretation of information available to medical examiners at the time of death. Misclassification may occur: studies report misclassification of cancer as a cause of death in 15%–35% of death certificates based on evaluation by expert panels and/or autopsy reports. Further misclassification may occur when coding death causes in the cancer registry. Researchers should be aware of potential misclassification bias when using cancer registry data. Differential misclassification may bias the results towards or away from the null hypothesis, depending on whether there is relative over- or under-reporting of cancer-related deaths in one group. Strategies to improve reporting of cancer-specific survival/mortality include (1) describing the procedure used to identify cancer-specific deaths; (2) considering the use of multiple definitions of cancer-related deaths (strict/liberal definitions of cancer-specific deaths, and/or addition of relative survival as an outcome); and (3) reporting cancer-specific survival/mortality together with the objectively measured parameters overall survival or all-cause mortality.     

Estimating bias in causes of death ascertainment in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer

BackgroundPrecise cause of death (CoD) ascertainment is crucial in any cancer screening trial to avoid bias from misclassification due to excessive recording of diagnosed cancer as a CoD in death certificates instead of non-cancer disease that actually caused death. We estimated whether there was bias in CoD determination between screening (SA) and control arms (CA) in a population-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening trial.MethodsOur trial is the largest component of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer with more than 80,000 men. Randomly selected deaths in men with PCa (N = 442/2568 cases, 17.2%) were reviewed by an independent CoD committee. Median follow-up was 16.8 years in both arms.ResultsOverdiagnosis of PCa was present in the SA as the risk ratio for PCa incidence was 1.19 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14–1.24). The hazard ratio (HR) for PCa mortality was 0.94 (95%CI 0.82–1.08) in favor of the SA. Agreement with official CoD registry was 94.6% (κ = 0.88) in the SA and 95.4% (κ = 0.91) in the CA. Altogether 14 PCa deaths were estimated as false-positive in both arms and exclusion of these resulted in HR 0.92 (95% CI 0.80–1.06).ConclusionsA small differential misclassification bias in ascertainment of CoD was present, most likely due to attribution bias (overdiagnosis in the SA). Maximum precision in CoD ascertainment can only be achieved with independent review of all deaths in the diseased population. However, this is cumbersome and expensive and may provide little benefit compared to random sampling.     

Malignant neoplasms after radiation therapy for peptic ulcer

Most information on radiation-related cancer risk comes from the Life Span Study (LSS) of the Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Stomach cancer mortality rates are much higher in Japan than in the U.S., making the applicability of LSS findings to the U.S. population uncertain. A unique cohort of U.S. patients who were irradiated for peptic ulcer to control gastric secretion provides a different perspective on risk. Cancer mortality data were analyzed and relative risks estimated for 3719 subjects treated by radiotherapy (mean stomach dose 14.8 Gy) and/or by surgery and medication during the period 1936-1965 and followed through 1997 (average 25 years). Compared to the U.S. rates, stomach cancer mortality was significantly increased for irradiated and nonirradiated patients (observed/expected = 3.20 and 1.52, respectively). We observed strong evidence of exposure-related excess mortality from cancer of the stomach (RR 2.6, 95% CI 1.3, 5.1), pancreas (RR 2.7, 95% CI 1.5, 5.1), and lung (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1, 2.1), with commensurate radiation dose responses in analyses that included nonexposed patients. However, the dose responses for these cancers were not significant when restricted to exposed patients. Our excess relative risk per gray estimate of 0.20 at doses 相似文献   

Organ doses from radiation therapy in atomic bomb survivors

Previous surveys of radiation therapy among the Life Span Study (LSS) population at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) revealed that 1,670 (1.4%) of the LSS participants received radiation treatments before 1984. The data on therapeutic radiation doses are indispensable for studying the relationship between radiation treatments and subsequent cancer occurrences. In this study, the radiation treatments were reproduced experimentally to determine the scattered radiation doses. The experiments were conducted using a female human phantom and various radiation sources, including a medium-voltage X-ray machine and a (60)Co gamma-ray source. Doses were measured using thermoluminescence dosimetry and ionization chambers. Radiation doses were determined for the salivary glands, thyroid gland, breast, lung, stomach, colon, ovary and active bone marrow. The results have been used for documenting the organ doses received by patients in previous surveys. The contribution of therapeutic irradiation to the occurrence of chromosome aberrations was studied using data on doses to active bone marrow from both radiation treatments and atomic bomb exposures in 26 RERF Adult Health Study participants. The results suggest that radiation treatments contributed to a large part of their frequencies of stable-type chromosome aberrations. The therapeutic radiation doses determined in the present study are available for investigating the effects of therapeutic irradiation on the subsequent primary cancers among atomic bomb survivors who received radiation treatments.     

Partner status and survival after cancer: A competing risks analysis

ObjectiveThe survival benefits of having a partner for all cancers combined is well recognized, however its prognostic importance for individual cancer types, including competing mortality causes, is less clear. This study was undertaken to quantify the impact of partner status on survival due to cancer-specific and competing mortality causes.MethodsData were obtained from the population-based Queensland Cancer Registry on 176,050 incident cases of ten leading cancers diagnosed in Queensland (Australia) from 1996 to 2012. Flexible parametric competing-risks models were used to estimate cause-specific hazards and cumulative probabilities of death, adjusting for age, stage (breast, colorectal and melanoma only) and stratifying by sex.ResultsBoth unpartnered males and females had higher total cumulative probability of death than their partnered counterparts for each site. For example, the survival disadvantage for unpartnered males ranged from 3% to 30% with higher mortality burden from both the primary cancer and competing mortality causes. The cause-specific age-adjusted hazard ratios were also consistent with patients without a partner having increased mortality risk although the specific effect varied by site, sex and cause of death. For all combined sites, unpartnered males had a 46%, 18% and 44% higher risk of cancer-specific, other cancer and non-cancer mortality respectively with similar patterns for females. The higher mortality risk persisted after adjustment for stage.ConclusionsIt is important to better understand the mechanisms by which having a partner is beneficial following a cancer diagnosis, so that this can inform improvements in cancer management for all people with cancer.     

Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, Report 14, 1950-2003: an overview of cancer and noncancer diseases

This is the 14th report in a series of periodic general reports on mortality in the Life Span Study (LSS) cohort of atomic bomb survivors followed by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation to investigate the late health effects of the radiation from the atomic bombs. During the period 1950-2003, 58% of the 86,611 LSS cohort members with DS02 dose estimates have died. The 6 years of additional follow-up since the previous report provide substantially more information at longer periods after radiation exposure (17% more cancer deaths), especially among those under age 10 at exposure (58% more deaths). Poisson regression methods were used to investigate the magnitude of the radiation-associated risks, the shape of the dose response, and effect modification by gender, age at exposure, and attained age. The risk of all causes of death was positively associated with radiation dose. Importantly, for solid cancers the additive radiation risk (i.e., excess cancer cases per 10(4) person-years per Gy) continues to increase throughout life with a linear dose-response relationship. The sex-averaged excess relative risk per Gy was 0.42 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.32, 0.53] for all solid cancer at age 70 years after exposure at age 30 based on a linear model. The risk increased by about 29% per decade decrease in age at exposure (95% CI: 17%, 41%). The estimated lowest dose range with a significant ERR for all solid cancer was 0 to 0.20 Gy, and a formal dose-threshold analysis indicated no threshold; i.e., zero dose was the best estimate of the threshold. The risk of cancer mortality increased significantly for most major sites, including stomach, lung, liver, colon, breast, gallbladder, esophagus, bladder and ovary, whereas rectum, pancreas, uterus, prostate and kidney parenchyma did not have significantly increased risks. An increased risk of non-neoplastic diseases including the circulatory, respiratory and digestive systems was observed, but whether these are causal relationships requires further investigation. There was no evidence of a radiation effect for infectious or external causes of death.     

Bayesian sensitivity analysis methods to evaluate bias due to misclassification and missing data using informative priors and external validation data

Background: Recent research suggests that the Bayesian paradigm may be useful for modeling biases in epidemiological studies, such as those due to misclassification and missing data. We used Bayesian methods to perform sensitivity analyses for assessing the robustness of study findings to the potential effect of these two important sources of bias. Methods: We used data from a study of the joint associations of radiotherapy and smoking with primary lung cancer among breast cancer survivors. We used Bayesian methods to provide an operational way to combine both validation data and expert opinion to account for misclassification of the two risk factors and missing data. For comparative purposes we considered a “full model” that allowed for both misclassification and missing data, along with alternative models that considered only misclassification or missing data, and the naïve model that ignored both sources of bias. Results: We identified noticeable differences between the four models with respect to the posterior distributions of the odds ratios that described the joint associations of radiotherapy and smoking with primary lung cancer. Despite those differences we found that the general conclusions regarding the pattern of associations were the same regardless of the model used. Overall our results indicate a nonsignificantly decreased lung cancer risk due to radiotherapy among nonsmokers, and a mildly increased risk among smokers. Conclusions: We described easy to implement Bayesian methods to perform sensitivity analyses for assessing the robustness of study findings to misclassification and missing data.     

Association of Kidney Disease Measures with Cause-Specific Mortality: The Korean Heart Study

BackgroundThe link of low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and high proteinuria to cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality is well known. However, its link to mortality due to other causes is less clear.MethodsWe studied 367,932 adults (20–93 years old) in the Korean Heart Study (baseline between 1996–2004 and follow-up until 2011) and assessed the associations of creatinine-based eGFR and dipstick proteinuria with mortality due to CVD (1,608 cases), cancer (4,035 cases), and other (non-CVD/non-cancer) causes (3,152 cases) after adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsAlthough cancer was overall the most common cause of mortality, in participants with chronic kidney disease (CKD), non-CVD/non-cancer mortality accounted for approximately half of cause of death (47.0%for eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73m² and 54.3% for proteinuria ≥1+). Lower eGFR (<60 vs. ≥60 ml/min/1.73m²) was significantly associated with mortality due to CVD (adjusted hazard ratio 1.49 [95% CI, 1.24–1.78]) and non-CVD/non-cancer causes (1.78 [1.54–2.05]). The risk of cancer mortality only reached significance at eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73m² when eGFR 45–59 ml/min/1.73m² was set as a reference (1.62 [1.10–2.39]). High proteinuria (dipstick ≥1+ vs. negative/trace) was consistently associated with mortality due to CVD (1.93 [1.66–2.25]), cancer (1.49 [1.32–1.68]), and other causes (2.19 [1.96–2.45]). Examining finer mortality causes, low eGFR and high proteinuria were commonly associated with mortality due to coronary heart disease, any infectious disease, diabetes, and renal failure. In addition, proteinuria was also related to death from stroke, cancers of stomach, liver, pancreas, and lung, myeloma, pneumonia, and viral hepatitis.ConclusionLow eGFR was associated with CVD and non-CVD/non-cancer mortality, whereas higher proteinuria was consistently related to mortality due to CVD, cancer, and other causes. These findings suggest the need for multidisciplinary prevention and management strategies in individuals with CKD, particularly when proteinuria is present.     

Quantifying Cancer Absolute Risk and Cancer Mortality in the Presence of Competing Events after a Myotonic Dystrophy Diagnosis

Recent studies show that patients with myotonic dystrophy (DM) have an increased risk of specific malignancies, but estimates of absolute cancer risk accounting for competing events are lacking. Using the Swedish Patient Registry, we identified 1,081 patients with an inpatient and/or outpatient diagnosis of DM between 1987 and 2007. Date and cause of death and date of cancer diagnosis were extracted from the Swedish Cause of Death and Cancer Registries. We calculated non-parametric estimates of absolute cancer risk and cancer mortality accounting for the high non-cancer competing mortality associated with DM. Absolute cancer risk after DM diagnosis was 1.6% (95% CI=0.4-4%), 5% (95% CI=3-9%) and 9% (95% CI=6-13%) at ages 40, 50 and 60 years, respectively. Females had a higher absolute risk of all cancers combined than males: 9% (95% CI=4-14), and 13% (95% CI=9-20) vs. 2% (95%CI= 0.7-6) and 4% (95%CI=2-8) by ages 50 and 60 years, respectively) and developed cancer at younger ages (median age =51 years, range=22-74 vs. 57, range=43-84, respectively, p=0.02). Cancer deaths accounted for 10% of all deaths, with an absolute cancer mortality risk of 2% (95%CI=1-4.5%), 4% (95%CI=2-6%), and 6% (95%CI=4-9%) by ages 50, 60, and 70 years, respectively. No gender difference in cancer-specific mortality was observed (p=0.6). In conclusion, cancer significantly contributes to morbidity and mortality in DM patients, even after accounting for high competing DM mortality from non-neoplastic causes. It is important to apply population-appropriate, validated cancer screening strategies in DM patients.     

Exposure to ionizing radiation and brain cancer incidence: The Life Span Study cohort

BackgroundIonizing radiation is a cause of cancer. This paper examines the effects of radiation dose and age at exposure on the incidence of brain cancer using data from the Life Span Study (LSS) of atomic bomb survivors.MethodsThe Radiation Effects Research Foundation website provides demographic details of the LSS population, estimated radiation doses at time of bomb in 1945, person years of follow-up and incident cancers from 1958 to 1998. We modelled brain cancer incidence using background-stratified Poisson regression, and compared the excess relative risk (ERR) per Gray (Gy) of brain dose with estimates from follow-up studies of children exposed to diagnostic CT scans.ResultsAfter exposure to atomic bomb radiation at 10 years of age the estimated ERR/Gy was 0.91 (90%CI 0.53, 1.40) compared with 0.07 (90%CI −0.27, 0.56) following exposure at age 40. Exposure at 10 years of age led to an estimated excess of 17 brain tumors per 100,000 person year (pyr) Gy by 60 years of age. These LSS estimates are substantially less than estimates based on follow-up of children exposed to CT scans.ConclusionEstimates of ERR/Gy for brain cancers in the LSS and haemangioma cohorts seem much smaller than estimates of risk for young persons in the early years after exposure to CT-scans. This could be due to reverse causation bias in the CT cohorts, diagnostic error, measurement error with radiation doses, loss of early follow-up in the LSS, or non-linearity of the dose-response curve.     

Lifetime socioeconomic position and mortality: prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the influence of socioeconomic position over a lifetime on risk factors for cardiovascular disease, on morbidity, and on mortality from various causes. DESIGN: Prospective observational study with 21 years of follow up. Social class was determined as manual or non-manual at three stages of participants'' lives: from the social class of their father''s job, the social class of their first job, and the social class of their job at the time of screening. A cumulative social class indicator was constructed, ranging from non-manual social class at all three stages of life to manual social class at all three stages. SETTING: 27 workplaces in the west of Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: 5766 men aged 35-64 at the time of examination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and level of risk factors for cardiovascular disease; morbidity; and mortality from broad causes of death. RESULTS: From non-manual social class locations at all three life stages to manual at all stages there were strong positive trends for blood pressure, body mass index, current cigarette smoking, angina, and bronchitis. Inverse trends were seen for height, cholesterol concentration, lung function, and being an ex-smoker. 1580 men died during follow up. Age adjusted relative death rates in comparison with the men of non-manual social class locations at all three stages of life were 1.29 (95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.56) in men of two non-manual and one manual social class; 1.45 (1.21 to 1.73) in men of two manual and one non-manual social class; and 1.71 (1.46 to 2.01) in men of manual social class at all three stages. Mortality from cardiovascular disease showed a similar graded association with cumulative social class. Mortality from cancer was mainly raised among men of manual social class at all three stages. Adjustment for a wide range of risk factors caused little attenuation in the association of cumulative social class with mortality from all causes and from cardiovascular disease; greater attenuation was seen in the association with mortality from non-cardiovascular, non-cancer disease. Fathers having a manual [corrected] occupation was strongly associated with mortality from cardiovascular disease: relative rate 1.41 (1.15 to 1.72). Participants'' social class at the time of screening was more strongly associated than the other social class indicators with mortality from cancer and from non-cardiovascular, non-cancer causes. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic factors acting over the lifetime affect health and risk of premature death. The relative importance of influences at different stages varies for the cause of death. Studies with data on socioeconomic circumstances at only one stage of life are inadequate for fully elucidating the contribution of socioeconomic factors to health and mortality risk.