Recent studies suggest that every year worldwide about a million patients might be exposed to doses of the order of 100 mGy of low-LET radiation, due to recurrent application of radioimaging procedures. This paper presents a synthesis of recent epidemiological evidence on radiation-related cancer risks from low-LET radiation doses of this magnitude. Evidence from pooled analyses and meta-analyses also involving epidemiological studies that, individually, do not find statistically significant radiation-related cancer risks is reviewed, and evidence from additional and more recent epidemiological studies of radiation exposures indicating excess cancer risks is also summarized. Cohorts discussed in the present paper include Japanese atomic bomb survivors, nuclear workers, patients exposed for medical purposes, and populations exposed environmentally to natural background radiation or radioactive contamination. Taken together, the overall evidence summarized here is based on studies including several million individuals, many of them followed-up for more than half a century. In summary, substantial evidence was found from epidemiological studies of exposed groups of humans that ionizing radiation causes cancer at acute and protracted doses above 100 mGy, and growing evidence for doses below 100 mGy. The significant radiation-related solid cancer risks observed at doses of several 100 mGy of protracted exposures (observed, for example, among nuclear workers) demonstrate that doses accumulated over many years at low dose rates do cause stochastic health effects. On this basis, it can be concluded that doses of the order of 100 mGy from recurrent application of medical imaging procedures involving ionizing radiation are of concern, from the viewpoint of radiological protection. 

Cancer risk following low doses of ionising radiation – Current epidemiological evidence and implications for radiological protection

This document presents the ICRP's updated vision on “Areas of Research to Support the System of Radiological Protection”, which have been previously published in 2017. It aims to complement the research priorities promoted by other relevant international organisations, with the specificity of placing them in the perspective of the evolution of the System of Radiological Protection. This document contributes to the process launched by ICRP to review and revise the System of Radiological Protection that will update the 2007 General Recommendations in ICRP Publication 103.

/pdf/areas-of-research-to-support-the-system-of-radiological-5c2tomi9kv.pdf

Areas of research to support the system of radiological protection.

Background Epidemiological studies have indicated that exposure of the heart to doses of ionizing radiation as low as 0.5 Gy increases the risk of cardiac morbidity and mortality with a latency period of decades. The damaging effects of radiation to myocardial and endothelial structures and functions have been confirmed radiobiologically at high dose, but much less are known at low dose. Integration of radiation biology and epidemiology data is a recommended approach to improve the radiation risk assessment process. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework offers a comprehensive tool to compile and translate mechanistic information into pathological endpoints which may be relevant for risk assessment at the different levels of a biological system. Omics technologies enable the generation of large volumes of biological data at various levels of complexity, from molecular pathways to functional organisms. Given the quality and quantity of available data across levels of biology, omics data can be attractive sources of information for use within the AOP framework. It is anticipated that radiation omics studies could improve our understanding of the molecular mechanisms behind the adverse effects of radiation on the cardiovascular system. In this review, we explored the available omics studies on radiation-induced cardiovascular disease (CVD) and their applicability to the proposed AOP for CVD.Results The results of 80 omics studies published on radiation-induced CVD over the past 20 years have been discussed in the context of the AOP of CVD proposed by Chauhan et al. Most of the available omics data on radiation-induced CVD are from proteomics, transcriptomics, and metabolomics, whereas few datasets were available from epigenomics and multi-omics. The omics data presented here show great promise in providing information for several key events (KEs) of the proposed AOP of CVD, particularly oxidative stress, alterations of energy metabolism, extracellular matrix (ECM), and vascular remodeling.Conclusions The omics data presented here shows promise to inform the various levels of the proposed AOP of CVD. However, the data highlight the urgent need of designing omics studies to address the knowledge gap concerning different radiation scenarios, time after exposure, and experimental models. This review presents the evidence to build a qualitative omics-informed AOP and provides views on the potential benefits and challenges in using omics data to assess risk-related outcomes. 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09553002.2022.2110325?needAccess=true

Application of radiation omics in the development of adverse outcome pathway networks: an example of radiation-induced cardiovascular disease

The consideration of risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations and their justification commonly relies on estimates of effective dose, although the quantity is actually a health-detriment-weighted summation of organ/tissue-absorbed doses rather than a measure of risk. In its 2007 Recommendations, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) defines effective dose in relation to a nominal value of stochastic detriment following low-level exposure of 5.7 × 10−2 Sv−1, as an average over both sexes, all ages, and two fixed composite populations (Asian and Euro-American). Effective dose represents the overall (whole-body) dose received by a person from a particular exposure, which can be used for the purposes of radiological protection as set out by ICRP, but it does not provide a measure that is specific to the characteristics of the exposed individual. However, the cancer incidence risk models used by ICRP can be used to provide estimates of risk separately for males and females, as a function of age-at-exposure, and for the two composite populations. Here, these organ/tissue-specific risk models are applied to estimates of organ/tissue-specific absorbed doses from a range of diagnostic procedures to derive lifetime excess cancer incidence risk estimates; the degree of heterogeneity in the distribution of absorbed doses between organs/tissues will depend on the procedure. Depending on the organs/tissues exposed, risks are generally higher in females and notably higher for younger ages-at-exposure. Comparing lifetime cancer incidence risks per Sv effective dose from the different procedures shows that overall risks are higher by about a factor of two to three for the youngest age-at-exposure group, 0–9 yr, than for 30–39 yr adults, and lower by a similar factor for an age-at-exposure of 60–69 yr. Taking into account these differences in risk per Sv, and noting the substantial uncertainties associated with risk estimates, effective dose as currently formulated provides a reasonable basis for assessing the potential risks from medical diagnostic examinations.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6498/acbda7/pdf

Effective doses and risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations for male and female patients from childhood to old age

Radiation detriment is a concept developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection to quantify the burden of stochastic effects from low-dose and/or low-dose-rate exposures to the human population. It is determined from the lifetime risks of cancer for a set of organs and tissues and the risk of heritable effects, taking into account the severity of the consequences. This publication provides a historical review of detriment calculation methodology since ICRP Publication 26, with details of the procedure developed in ICRP Publication 103, which clarifies data sources, risk models, computational methods, and rationale for the choice of parameter values. A selected sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify the parameters and calculation conditions that can be major sources of variation and uncertainty in the calculation of radiation detriment. It has demonstrated that sex, age at exposure, dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor, dose assumption in the calculation of lifetime risk, and lethality fraction have a substantial impact on radiation detriment values. Although the current scheme of radiation detriment calculation is well established, it needs to evolve to better reflect changes in population health statistics and progress in scientific understanding of radiation health effects. In this regard, some key parameters require updating, such as the reference population data and cancer severity. There is also room for improvement in cancer risk models based on the accumulation of recent epidemiological findings. Finally, the importance of improving the comprehensibility of the detriment concept and the transparency of its calculation process is emphasised. © 2022 ICRP. Published by SAGE.

ICRP PUBLICATION 152 Approved by the Commission in November 2021

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has embarked on a review and revision of the System of Radiological Protection that will update the 2007 General Recommendations in ICRP Publication 103. This is the beginning of a process that will take several years, involving open and transparent engagement with organisations and individuals around the world. While the System is robust and has performed well, it must adapt to address changes in science and society to remain fit for purpose. The aim of this paper is to encourage discussions on which areas of the System might gain the greatest benefit from review, and to initiate collaborative efforts. Increased clarity and consistency are high priorities. The better the System is understood, the more effectively it can be applied, resulting in improved protection and increased harmonisation. Many areas are identified for potential review including: classification of effects, with particular focus on tissue reactions; reformulation of detriment, potentially including non-cancer diseases; re-evaluation of the relationship between detriment and effective dose, and the possibility of defining detriments for males and females of different ages; individual variation in the response to radiation exposure; heritable effects; and effects and risks in non-human biota and ecosystems. Some of the basic concepts are also being considered, including the framework for bringing together protection of people and the environment, incremental improvements to the fundamental principles of justification and optimisation, a broader approach to protection of individuals, and clarification of the exposure situations introduced in 2007. In addition, ICRP is considering identifying where explicit incorporation of the ethical basis of the System would be beneficial, how to better reflect the importance of communications and stakeholder involvement, and further advice on education and training. ICRP invites responses on these and other areas relating to the review of the System of Radiological Protection.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6498/ac1611/pdf

Keeping the ICRP recommendations fit for purpose.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Werner Ruehm

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Keeping the ICRP recommendations fit for purpose.