Analysis of generalized models of radiogenic risk Part 2. UNSCEAR models

«Radiation and Risk», 2016, vol. 25, No. 4, pp.63-79

DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2016-25-4-63-79

Authors

Gubin A.T. – Head of Lab., C. Sc., Phys.-Math. Research and Technical Center of Radiation-Chemical Safety and Hygiene (RTC RCSH), Moscow, Russia. Contacts: 40 Shukinskaya str., Moscow, Russia, 123182. Tel.: +7 (499) 193-12-74; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Sakovich V.A. – Researcher-in-Chief, D. Sc., Phys.-Math., Prof. Research and Technical Center of Radiation-Chemical Safety and Hygiene (RTC RCSH), Moscow, Russia.

Abstract

Analyzed generalized risk models are presented in UNSCEAR 2006. In the paper is analyzed generalized models of absolute and relative risks from tables 45-58 the report of UNSCEAR 2006. Presented the mathematical formula that generalizes these models together with unificated constants tables for all of the locations and risk indicators. As the main criterion of reliability of the models considered the compliance of the corresponding background models of morbidity and mortality (EAR/ERR), with the background data for the composite population ICRP, Japanese, and Russian populations. A fundamental disadvantage of non-linear models UNSCEAR consist that they are giving the models background morbidity and mortality that are dose-dependent. Background incidence and mortality models for linear risk models in quantitative, and to some cancers and qualitative terms, are not consistent with statistical data. The sets of models UNSCEAR and ICRP, both fitted to the same LSS data, in general poor agree with each other. The results of the comparative analysis of the two sets of models do not allow giving clear preference to one of them. For estimates of radiogenic cancer of the thyroid is preferable to apply the UNSCEAR model, while for cancers of the colon and lung more accurate estimates can be obtained by ICRP models. The choice of model should performed separately for each cancer localization with regard to the objectives of risk assessment and characteristics of the solved problems.

Key words
Radiation safety, ICRP recommendations, risk coefficients, radiogenic risks, mathematical models, solid cancers, radiogenic incidence, radiogenic mortality.

References

1. Gubin A.T., Sakovich V.A. Analysis of generalized models of radiogenic risk. Part 1. ICRP models. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2016, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 48-62. (In Russian).

2. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Eds.: M.F. Kiselev, N.K. Shandala. Moscow, PKF «Alana», 2009. 344 p. (In Russian).

3. Effects of Ionizing Radiation. UNSCEAR 2006 Report to the General Assembly with Scientific Annexes. Annex A: Epidemiological studies of radiation and cancer. New York, UN, 2008. 322 p.

4. Assessment of the radiation risk of the population due to the long uniform man-made radiation in small doses: guidelines MU 2.1.10.3014-2012. Moscow, Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology of Rospotrebnadzor, 2011. 26 p. (In Russian).

5. Methodical bases of development of documents for the determination of radiogenic mortality risk resulting from exposure in the controlled limits conditions: recommendations FMBA of Russia 21.07-2016. Moscow, Alpha-Print Pub, 2016. 52 p. (In Russian).

6. Gubin A.Т., Sakovich V.A. Methodological problems of practical radiogenic risk assessments. Radiatsionnaya gygiena – Radiation Hygiene, 2014, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 16-22. (In Russian).

7. Chekin S.Yu., Maksioutov M.A., Meniailo A.N., Vlasov O.K., Shchukina N.V., Korelo A.M., Tumanov K.A., Ivanov V.K. Methods and criteria of formation of groups of radiation risk among the population of the contaminated regions of the Russian Federation and Republic of Belarus. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2015, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 23-34. (In Russian).

8. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2010 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: V.I. Chissov., V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2012. 260 p. (In Russian).

9. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2011 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: V.I. Chissov., V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2013. 289 p. (In Russian).

10. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2012 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2014. 250 p. (In Russian).

11. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2013 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2015. 250 p. (In Russian).

12. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2014 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2016. 250 p. (In Russian).

13. WHO database on mortality (the version from November 25, 2015).

14. WHO database on mortality (the version from November 25, 2015). Available at: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/mortality_rawdata/en (Accessed 25.10.2016).

15. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Ed.: I.B. Keirim-Markus. Moscow, Energoatomizdat, 1994. Part 2. 344 p. (In Russian).

16. Preston D.L., Ron E., Tokuoka S., Funamoto S., Nishi N., Soda M., Mabuchi K., Kodama K. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiat. Res., 2007, vol. 168, no 1, pp. 1-64.

17. Gubin A.T., Sakovich V.A. On some peculiarities of the Japanese cohort for a lifetime study, important from the point of view of assessment and interpopulation transfer of risk. Meditsina ekstremalnykh situatsij – Medicine
of Extreme Situations, 2010, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 77-90. (In Russian).

18. Gubin A.T., Red’ko V.I., Sakovich V.A. Quasibiological model of radiogenic cancer morbidity. Radiatsionnaya gygiena – Radiation Hygiene, 2015, vol. 8, no 4, pp. 3-31. (In Russian).

Full-text article (in Russian)