SOURCES AND EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION : United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes

The number of computed tomographic (CT) studies performed is increasing rapidly. Because CT scans involve much higher doses of radiation than plain films, we are seeing a marked increase in radiation exposure in the general population. Epidemiologic studies indicate that the radiation dose from even two or three CT scans results in a detectable increase in the risk of cancer, especially in children. This article summarizes the facts about this form of radiation exposure and the implications for public health.

/pdf/computed-tomography-an-increasing-source-of-radiation-4b5ic1x47d.pdf

Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure

Since the publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 2005, new information has emerged that requires that the guidelines be updated. The full version of the new guidelines is available on the AASLD Web site at http://www.aasld.org/practiceguidelines/ Documents/Bookmarked%20Practice%20Guidelines/ HCCUpdate2010.pdf. Here, we briefly describe only new or changed recommendations.

/pdf/aasld-practice-guideline-management-of-hepatocellular-51bocalv0r.pdf

AASLD PRACTICE GUIDELINE Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Update

NOTE The report of the Committee without its annexes appears as Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 46. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The country names used in this document are, in most cases, those that were in use at the time the data were collected or the text prepared. In other cases, however, the names have been updated, where this was possible and appropriate, to reflect political changes. Scientific Annexes Annex A. Medical radiation exposures Annex B. Exposures of the public and workers from various sources of radiation INTROdUCTION 1. In the course of the research and development for and the application of atomic energy and nuclear technologies, a number of radiation accidents have occurred. Some of these accidents have resulted in significant health effects and occasionally in fatal outcomes. The application of technologies that make use of radiation is increasingly widespread around the world. Millions of people have occupations related to the use of radiation, and hundreds of millions of individuals benefit from these uses. Facilities using intense radiation sources for energy production and for purposes such as radiotherapy, sterilization of products, preservation of foodstuffs and gamma radiography require special care in the design and operation of equipment to avoid radiation injury to workers or to the public. Experience has shown that such technology is generally used safely, but on occasion controls have been circumvented and serious radiation accidents have ensued. 2. Reviews of radiation exposures from accidents have been presented in previous UNSCEAR reports. The last report containing an exclusive chapter on exposures from accidents was the UNSCEAR 1993 Report [U6]. 3. This annex is aimed at providing a sound basis for conclusions regarding the number of significant radiation accidents that have occurred, the corresponding levels of radiation exposures and numbers of deaths and injuries, and the general trends for various practices. Its conclusions are to be seen in the context of the Committee's overall evaluations of the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. 4. The Committee's evaluations of public, occupational and medical diagnostic exposures are mostly concerned with chronic exposures of …

sources and effects of ionizing radiation

1. INTRODUCTION 2. THE AIMS AND SCOPE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS 3. BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION 4. QUANTITIES USED IN RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION 5. THE SYSTEM OF RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION OF HUMANS 6. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS 7. MEDICAL EXPOSURE OF PATIENTS, COMFORTERS AND CARERS, AND VOLUNTEERS in BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH 8. PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT

The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection

OBJECTIVE. In light of the rapidly increasing frequency of pediatric CT examinations, the purpose of our study was to assess the lifetime cancer mortality risks attributable to radiation from pediatric CT.MATERIALS AND METHODS. Organ doses as a function of age-at-diagnosis were estimated for common CT examinations, and estimated attributable lifetime cancer mortality risks (per unit dose) for different organ sites were applied. Standard models that assume a linear extrapolation of risks from intermediate to low doses were applied. On the basis of current standard practice, the same exposures (milliampere-seconds) were assumed, independent of age.RESULTS. The larger doses and increased lifetime radiation risks in children produce a sharp increase, relative to adults, in estimated risk from CT. Estimated lifetime cancer mortality risks attributable to the radiation exposure from a CT in a 1-year-old are 0.18% (abdominal) and 0.07% (head)—an order of magnitude higher than for adults—although those figures st...

https://www.ajronline.org/doi/pdf/10.2214/ajr.176.2.1760289

Estimated Risks of Radiation-Induced Fatal Cancer from Pediatric CT

High doses of ionizing radiation clearly produce deleterious consequences in humans, including, but not exclusively, cancer induction. At very low radiation doses the situation is much less clear, but the risks of low-dose radiation are of societal importance in relation to issues as varied as screening tests for cancer, the future of nuclear power, occupational radiation exposure, frequent-flyer risks, manned space exploration, and radiological terrorism. We review the difficulties involved in quantifying the risks of low-dose radiation and address two specific questions. First, what is the lowest dose of x- or γ-radiation for which good evidence exists of increased cancer risks in humans? The epidemiological data suggest that it is ≈10–50 mSv for an acute exposure and ≈50–100 mSv for a protracted exposure. Second, what is the most appropriate way to extrapolate such cancer risk estimates to still lower doses? Given that it is supported by experimentally grounded, quantifiable, biophysical arguments, a linear extrapolation of cancer risks from intermediate to very low doses currently appears to be the most appropriate methodology. This linearity assumption is not necessarily the most conservative approach, and it is likely that it will result in an underestimate of some radiation-induced cancer risks and an overestimate of others.

/pdf/cancer-risks-attributable-to-low-doses-of-ionizing-radiation-2n8doo68ko.pdf

Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know

Conversion Coefficients for Use in Radiological Protection against External Radiation

Purpose: To investigate whether current fractionation and brachytherapy protraction schemes for the treatment of prostatic cancer with radiation are optimal, or could be improved. Methods and Materials: We analyzed two mature data sets on radiotherapeutic tumor control for prostate cancer, one using EBRT and the other permanent seed implants, to extract the sensitivity to changes in fractionation of prostatic tumors. The standard linear-quadratic model was used for the analysis. Results: Prostatic cancers appear significantly more sensitive to changes in fractionation than most other cancers. The estimated α/β value is 1.5 Gy [0.8, 2.2]. This result is not too surprising as there is a documented relationship between cellular proliferative status and sensitivity to changes in fractionation, and prostatic tumors contain exceptionally low proportions of proliferating cells. Conclusions: High dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy would be a highly appropriate modality for treating prostate cancer. Appropriately designed HDR brachytherapy regimens would be expected to be as efficacious as low dose rate, but with added advantages of logistic convenience and more reliable dose distributions. Similarly, external beam treatments for prostate cancer can be designed using larger doses per fraction; appropriately designed hypofractionation schemes would be expected to maintain current levels of tumor control and late sequelae, but with reduced acute morbidity, together with the logistic and financial advantages of fewer numbers of fractions.

/pdf/fractionation-and-protraction-for-radiotherapy-of-prostate-3wuaxb6yfc.pdf

David J. Brenner

Papers

Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure

Estimated Risks of Radiation-Induced Fatal Cancer from Pediatric CT

Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know

Conversion Coefficients for Use in Radiological Protection against External Radiation

Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma