RADIATION & RISK
Bulletin of the National Radiation and Epidemiological Registry
since 1992

Assessment of damage from radiological and environmental factors of carcinogenic risk: modern international technologies

«Radiation and Risk», 2025, vol. 34, No. 2, pp.5-20

DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2025-34-2-5-20

Authors

Ivanov V.K. – Scientific Advisor of NRER, Chief Radioecologist of Project “Proryv”, Chairman of RSCRP, Corresponding Member of RAS, D. Sc., Tech., Prof.
Chekin S.Yu. – Head of Lab. Contacts: 4 Korolyov str., Obninsk, Kaluga region, Russia, 249035. Tel.: (484) 399-30-79; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Menyajlo A.N. – Lead. Researcher, C. Sc., Biol.
Karpenko S.V. – Engineer
Pryakhin E.A. – Researcher
Kashcheeva P.V. – Sen. Researcher, C. Sc., Biol. A. Tsyb MRRC.
Adamov E.O. – Research Advisor, Project “Proryv”, D. Sc., Tech., Prof.
Solomatin V.M. – Head of Dep. of the Chief Radioecologist, Project “Proryv”, C. Sc., Biol. JSC “Proryv”.
1 AJoint Stock Company “Proryv”, Moscow
2 A. Tsyb MRRC, Obninsk

Abstract

The priority task formulated in the Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the field of nuclear and radiation safety is to reduce the risk of long-term consequences of technogenic radiation exposure for human health. At the currently achieved level of radiation safety in Russia, radiation risks for public and personnel health become less than the health risks from existing non-radiation risk factors associated with technogenic environmental contamination. At present, the basic risk metrics for radiation exposure factors are radiological detriment (RD) and radiation-induced decrease in life expectancy (or healthy life) YLL (Years of Life Lost), used by the International Commis-sion on Radiological Protection (ICRP). To assess the damage to human health from exposure to various non-radiation risk factors, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the use of the attributable disease burden ratio DALY (Disability Adjusted Life Years), which expresses the excess loss of years of active human life due to the factors in force. When jointly assessing or comparing the detriment to human health from radiation and non-radiation carcinogenic risk factors, both detriment metrics – RD and DALY – should be calculated for these two factors. In this article such calculation methods are developed taking into account modern international recommendations. As a practical example of calculations, it is shown that carcinogenic radiation risks of the population from annual emissions of the BREST-OD-300 reactor facility do not exceed the negligible radiation risk value of 10-6, while the carcinogenic risk of the population from existing non-radiative environmental contamination is 8 times higher (up to 8x10-6). In the last three years, ICRP has raised the issue of the need for convergence of RD and DALY metrics to address human radiation protection. This study shows that the current methods of calculating RD and DALY are robust with respect to the underlying epidemiological data and transfer well from the reference international populations used by the ICRP and WHO to Russian cohorts and populations. Further research is needed to more fully localize the methods for calculating RD and DALY in the Russian context or to apply them to populations in other countries.

Key words
carcinogenic risk, radiation risk factors, non-radiation risk factors, radiological detriment, non-radiological detriment, attributable life-years lost, disease severity, disability adjusted life years lost (DALY), radiobiology, public health.

References

1. ICRP Publication 103. Eds.: M.F. Kiselev, N.K. Shandala. Moscow, PKF «Alana», 2009. 343 p. Available at: http://www.icrp.org/docs/P103_Russian.pdf (Accessed 28.04.2025). (In Russian).

2. ICRP Publication 60, part 2. Ed.: I.B. Kerim-Markus. Moscow, Energoatomizdat, 1994. 207 p. (In Russian).

3. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 2006 Report Vol. I, Annex A: Epidemiological studies of radiation and cancer. New York, United Nation, 2008.

4

. Health risk assessment from the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami based on a preliminary dose estimation. Geneva, WHO, 2013. 167 p.

5. Preston D.L., Kusumi S., Tomonaga M., Izumi S., Ron E., Kuramoto A., Kamada N., Dohy H., Matsuo T., Nonaka H., Thompson D.E., Soda M., Mabuchi K. Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part III: Leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma, 1950-1987. Radiat. Res.,1994, vol. 137, pp. 68-97.

6. Methods for estimating the probability of cancer from occupational radiation exposure. IAEA-TECDOC-870. Vienna, IAEA, 1996.

7. ICRP, 1973. Implications of commission recommendations that doses be kept as low as readily achievable. ICRP Publication 22. Oxford, Pergamon Press, 1973. 22 p.

8. Global burden of disease 2004 update: disability weights for diseases and conditions. Geneva, WHO, 2004. Available at: https://files.givewell.org/files/ DWDA%202009/Interventions/voluntary_male_medical_circumcision/World_Health_Organization-Disability_Weights_for_Diseases_and_Conditions_2004.pdf (Accessed 28.04.2025).

9. Homedes N. The disability-adjusted life year (DALY) definition, measurement and potential use. World Bank Group, USA, 1996. Available at: https://documents1.worldbank.org/cu-rated/en/482351468764408897/pdf/multi0page.pdf (28.04.2025).

10. ICRP, 2022. Radiation detriment calculation methodology. ICRP Publication 152. Ann. ICRP, 2022, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 1-95.

11. Disease burden by risk factor, World, 2021. Available at: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/disease-burden-by-risk-factor (Accessed 28.04.2025).

12. Radiation Safety Standards (RSS-99/2009). Sanitary-epidemiological rules and standards. Moscow, Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology of Rospotrebnadzor, 2009. 100 p. (In Russian).

13. Menyajlo A.N., Chekin S.Yu., Kashcheev V.V., Maksioutov М.А., Korelo A.M., Tumanov K.A., Pryakhin E.A., Lovachev S.S., Karpenko S.V., Kashcheeva P.V., Ivanov V.K. Lifetime attributable risks from external and internal exposure to radiation: method for estimating. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2018, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 8-21. (In Russian).

14. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2021 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, A.O. Shakhzadova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2022. 252 p. (In Russian).

15. Guidelines for the assessment of public health risk from exposure to chemical substances polluting the environment. Moscow, Federal Centre of Gossanepidnadzor of the Ministry of Health of Russia, 2004. 143 p. (In Russian).

16. United States Environment Protection Agency. Integrated Risk Information System. Available at: https://iris.epa.gov/AtoZ/?list_type=alpha (Accessed 28.04.2025).

17. Rühm W., Clement C., Cool D., Laurier D., Bochud F., Applegate K., Schneider T., Bouffler S., Cho K., Hirth G., Kai M., Liu S., Romanov S., Wojcik A. Summary of the 2021 ICRP workshop on the future of radiological protection. J. Radiol. Prot., 2022, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 023002. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6498/ac670e.

18. Grambow B. Radiological risk in the global burden of disease. ICRP Digital Workshop on the System of Radiological Protection, 2021. Available at: https://icrp.org/page.asp?id=553) (Accessed 28.04.2025).

19. Vaillant L., Kai M., Hauptmann M. Radiation detriment calculation methodology: review of current non-radi-ation-related parameters and perspectives. ICRP Digital Workshop on the System of Radiological Protection, 2021. Available at: https://icrp.org/page.asp?id=549 (Accessed 28.04.2025).

Full-text article (in Russian)