Studies of radon-exposed miner cohorts using a biologically based model: comparison of current Czech and French data with historic data from China and Colorado
Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic
Document type Clinical Trial, Comparative Study, Controlled Clinical Trial, Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Validation Study
- MeSH
- Algorithms MeSH
- Models, Biological * MeSH
- Radiation Dosage MeSH
- Risk Assessment methods MeSH
- Mining statistics & numerical data MeSH
- Incidence MeSH
- Cohort Studies MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Radiation Monitoring methods MeSH
- Lung Neoplasms mortality MeSH
- Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced mortality MeSH
- Body Burden MeSH
- Computer Simulation MeSH
- Proportional Hazards Models MeSH
- Radon analysis MeSH
- Relative Biological Effectiveness MeSH
- Risk Factors MeSH
- Age Distribution MeSH
- Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Controlled Clinical Trial MeSH
- Clinical Trial MeSH
- Multicenter Study MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Validation Study MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic epidemiology MeSH
- China epidemiology MeSH
- Colorado epidemiology MeSH
- France epidemiology MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Radon MeSH
The biologically based two-stage clonal expansion (TSCE) model is used to analyze lung cancer in several miners studies, two new ones (Czech, French) and two historic ones (Chinese, Colorado). In all cases, the model assumptions are identical. An action of radiation on initiation, promotion, and transformation is allowed. While all four studies indicate a highly significant action of radiation on promotion, the action on initiation is not significant in the French cohort, and barely significant in the Colorado miners cohort. No action on transformation is found in the Colorado miners, while the other data sets indicate a borderline significance. The model can describe all the data sets adequately, with different model parameters. The observed patterns in exposure, time since beginning of exposure, birth year, age and calendar year are reproduced well. The doubling exposure rate for initiation is about 3.5 WLM/year in the new data sets, while it is higher in the historic data sets. For transformation the doubling rate is about 20 WLM/year for the new data sets, while again the historic data give higher estimates. The action of radiation on promotion is quite different in the four data sets. These differences also induce different risk estimates at low exposures. The larger power of the new studies at these low exposures, compared to the historic data requires less extrapolation when the risk at very low exposures is estimated.
See more in PubMed
Radiat Res. 1999 Dec;152(6 Suppl):S59-63 PubMed
Health Phys. 1993 Apr;64(4):355-69 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1971 Apr;68(4):820-3 PubMed
Radiat Res. 1994 Aug;139(2):170-7 PubMed
Epidemiology. 1993 May;4(3):204-17 PubMed
Radiat Res. 1996 Feb;145(2):163-73 PubMed
Risk Anal. 2001 Feb;21(1):103-5 PubMed
Br J Dis Chest. 1979 Jan;73(1):1-17 PubMed
Radiat Res. 1994 Feb;137(2):251-61 PubMed
J Radiol Prot. 2002 Sep;22(3A):A71-4 PubMed
Int J Radiat Biol. 1992 May;61(5):625-9 PubMed
Radiat Environ Biophys. 1996 May;35(2):127-9 PubMed
J Radiol Prot. 2002 Sep;22(3A):A107-12 PubMed
Eur J Epidemiol. 2004;19(2):139-46 PubMed
Stat Med. 2002 Oct 30;21(20):3055-70 PubMed
J Radiol Prot. 2002 Sep;22(3A):A101-6 PubMed
Radiat Res. 1999 Feb;151(2):209-17 PubMed
Radiat Environ Biophys. 2004 Sep;43(3):189-201 PubMed
Stat Med. 2004 Nov 15;23(21):3333-50 PubMed
Br J Cancer. 1993 May;67(5):1090-7 PubMed
Radiat Environ Biophys. 2004 Sep;43(3):153-63 PubMed
Radiat Res. 1999 Oct;152(4):339-51 PubMed
Risk Anal. 1997 Jun;17(3):391-9 PubMed
Radiat Res. 2001 Jul;156(1):78-94 PubMed
Radiat Res. 2001 Nov;156(5 Pt 2):678-81 PubMed
