2008 APS March Meeting
Volume 53, Number 2
Monday–Friday, March 10–14, 2008;
New Orleans, Louisiana
Session U16: Focus Session: Medical Physics and Radiation Biology
8:00 AM–10:36 AM,
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Morial Convention Center
Room: 208
Sponsoring
Unit:
DBP
Chair: Richard Britten, Eastern Virginia Medical School
Abstract ID: BAPS.2008.MAR.U16.5
Abstract: U16.00005 : The Dose Response Relationship for Radiation Carcinogenesis*
9:12 AM–9:48 AM
Preview Abstract
Abstract
Author:
Eric Hall
(Columbia University)
Recent surveys show that the collective population radiation dose from
medical procedures in the U.S. has increased by 750{\%} in the past two
decades. It would be impossible to imagine the practice of medicine today
without diagnostic and therapeutic radiology, but nevertheless the
widespread and rapidly increasing use of a modality which is a known human
carcinogen is a cause for concern. To assess the magnitude of the problem it
is necessary to establish the shape of the dose response relationship for
radiation carcinogenesis.
Information on radiation carcinogenesis comes from the A-bomb survivors,
from occupationally exposed individuals and from radiotherapy patients. The
A-bomb survivor data indicates a linear relationship between dose and the
risk of solid cancers up to a dose of about 2.5 Sv. The lowest dose at which
there is a significant excess cancer risk is debatable, but it would appear
to be between 40 and 100 mSv. Data from the occupation exposure of nuclear
workers shows an excess cancer risk at an average dose of 19.4 mSv. At the
other end of the dose scale, data on second cancers in radiotherapy patients
indicates that cancer risk does not continue to rise as a linear function of
dose, but tends towards a plateau of 40 to 60 Gy, delivered in a
fractionated regime.
These data can be used to estimate the impact of diagnostic radiology at the
low dose end of the dose response relationship, and the impact of new
radiotherapy modalities at the high end of the dose response relationship.
In the case of diagnostic radiology about 90{\%} of the collective
population dose comes from procedures (principally CT scans) which involve
doses at which there is credible evidence of an excess cancer incidence.
While the risk to the individual is small and justified in a symptomatic
patient, the same is not true of some screening procedures is asymptomatic
individuals, and in any case the huge number of procedures must add up to a
potential public health problem.
In the case of radiation oncology, modern innovations such as Intensity
Modulated Radiation Oncology or Proton Therapy both result in a substantial
total-body dose to the patient, which must result in an increased incidence
of second cancers. The technology exists to reduce these total body doses
and the problem needs to be addressed.
*Supported by The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Grant NAG-9-1519 and The Department of Energy Low Dose Program grant DE-FG02-03ER63629
To cite this abstract, use the following reference: http://meetings.aps.org/link/BAPS.2008.MAR.U16.5