Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021;97(6):769-781.
doi: 10.1080/09553002.2020.1867926. Epub 2021 Jan 12.

A review of studies of childhood cancer and natural background radiation

Affiliations
Review

A review of studies of childhood cancer and natural background radiation

Gerald M Kendall et al. Int J Radiat Biol. 2021.

Abstract

Purpose: The projected existence and magnitude of carcinogenic effects of ionizing radiation at low doses and low-dose rates is perhaps the most important issue in radiation protection today. Studies of childhood cancer and natural background radiation have the potential to throw direct light on this question, into a dose range below a few tens of mSv. This paper describes the studies that have been undertaken and their context, discusses some problems that arise and summarizes the present position.

Conclusions: Many such studies have been undertaken, but most were too small to have a realistic chance of detecting the small effects expected from such low doses, based on risk projections from higher exposures. Case-control or cohort studies are to be preferred methodologically to ecological studies but can be prone to problems of registration/participation bias. Interview-based studies of the requisite size would be prohibitively expensive and would undoubtedly also run into problems of participation bias. Register-based studies can be very large and are free of participation bias. However, they need to estimate the radiation exposure of study subjects using models rather than individual measurements in the homes of those concerned. At present, no firm conclusions can be drawn from the studies that have been published to date. Further data and perhaps pooled studies offer a way forward.

Keywords: Background radiation; cancer; epidemiology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure Statement

Richard Wakeford receives a consultancy fee as a member of the Technical Working Party of the Compensation Scheme for Radiation-linked Diseases (http://www.csrld.org.uk). Dr Kendall and Dr Little report no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Relative Risks (Odds Ratios) per mSv cumulative bone marrow dose (whole body effective dose for Switzerland) with 95% confidence interval for induction of childhood leukemia by natural background gamma-rays in nationwide register-based studies from different countries.

References

    1. Alexander FE, McKinney PA, Cartwright RA. 1990. Radon and leukaemia. Lancet 335:1336–1337. - PubMed
    1. Amirian ES, Ostrom QT, Liu Y, Barnholtz-Sloan J, Bondy ML. 2018. Nervous system. In: Cancer epidemiology and prevention fourth edition, (Thun MJ, Linet MS, Cerhan JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld D, eds). New York, NY:Oxford University Press, 1039–1060.
    1. Andersen CE, Raaschou-Nielsen O, Andersen HP, Lind M, Gravesen P, Thomsen BL, et al. 2007. Prediction of 222rn in danish dwellings using geology and house construction information from central databases. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 123: 83–94. - PubMed
    1. Appleton JD, Miles JCH. 2010. A statistical evaluation of the geogenic controls on indoor radon concentrations and radon risk. J Environ Radioact 101:799–803. - PubMed
    1. Arnold L 2001. Britain and the h-bomb. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources