|
Headlines:
|
 |
Back to Oncology Articles
Sunday February 1, 2004 1:15 PM GMT
|
|
|
X-rays have been the cause of more than 5,600 cancer cases in the United
States according to the study.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
Diagnostic X-rays could be causing almost one of every 1,000 cases
of cancer in the United States, according to the estimates of a new
British study recently published in the Lancet.
Diagnostic X-rays and other radiodiagnostic devices
are the largest man made sources of radiation. Unfortunately, the
effects of radiation from these devices has not been previously studied
in a reliable way.
The importance of this new study lies in the fact
that there are no reliable data proving that radiation doses used in
diagnostic X-rays do indeed contribute to the development of cancer. On
the other hand, there is no threshold of radiation dose under which the
absence of any cancer risk is proven.
X-rays are a form of electromagnetic radiation of
extremely short wavelength. X-rays travel at the speed of light. On the
electromagnetic spectrum they lie between gamma rays and ultraviolet
radiation. Gamma rays have a high penetration ability, beta particles
come next whilst alpha particles are the heaviest and hence have the
lowest penetration ability.
To minimize the risks of developing caner, X-rays
are given at a low radiation doses. A chest X-ray delivers three to ten
days' worth of low, background radiation.
Background radiation comes from radioactivity in
our own bodies and the other bodies in the cosmos. It amounts to
approximately 3 millisievert (mSv) per year. Below is a list of other
X-ray studies and their corresponding radiation doses.
| X-ray Study |
Effective Dose (mSv) |
BERT (time to get same dose from nature) |
| Dental, intra-oral |
0.06 |
1 week |
| Chest x-ray |
0.08 |
3-10 days |
| Thoracic spine |
1.5 |
6 months |
| Lumbar spine |
3 |
1 year |
| Upper GI series |
4.5 |
1.5 years |
| Lower GI series |
6 |
2 years |
The benefits of X-rays is beyond doubt as regards
diagnosis and even in the industrial sector. However, fear arises as to
the effects of the radiation emitted by them and the consequences this
may have on the human body. In the lab radiation can penetrate through
cells and damage DNA and in some lab tests this has led to cancer.
Theoretically the same can be caused by the radiation effects of X-rays
in real life.

|
|
|
|
Are you a doctor or a nurse?
Do you want to join the Doctors Lounge online medical community?
Participate in editorial activities (publish, peer review, edit) and
give a helping hand to the largest online community of patients.
Click on the link below to see the requirements:
Doctors Lounge Membership
Application |
|
Previous attempts to quantify the risk of cancer from X-rays have been
made before. The most recent previous study was conducted in 1981 and
found that X-rays probably accounted for 0.5% of cancers in the United
States. The new estimates are twice that high for the United States.
This study represents a much needed update to the previous study as the
use X-rays has increased dramatically in the last 20 years.
Fear of the risk arises because the number of CT
exams done in recent years has increased steadily in comparison to
conventional radiology. CT exams deliver larger doses of X-rays than
conventional radiographs.
The study published in the Lancet used cancer-rate
data which was collected between 1991 and 1996 from survivors of the
Japanese atomic bombings as a model to study the risk of cancer from the
X-rays. They used the survivor data because it was the only time in
history in which a large population was exposed to ionizing radiation.
The disadvantages of using this model include the fact that the
survivors were not only exposed to X-rays and gamma rays but also to
beta radiation and maybe even alpha radiation through contaminated water
and food.
These researchers compiled their data on the
incidence of cancers from tumor registers in the UK and 14 other
countries. They compared these statistically with the numbers of X-ray
procedures done in these countries and statistically analyzed the
numbers of cancers induced by the radiation exposure from these
procedures. The lifetime risk of developing cancer attributable to
diagnostic X-rays was 0.6-1.8% in the countries investigated, except in
Japan where the lifetime risk was 3.2%, where X-ray use is more common.
In the US this was estimated to amount to 0.9% of all cancer cases. In
plain English this means that X-rays have been the cause of more than
5,600 cancer cases in the United States.
It isn't possible to know who will develop cancer
and which type of cancer on exposure to X-rays. To conclude, X-rays (and
CTs) should be prescribed by doctors when they are absolutely necessary
otherwise resorting to safer methods of investigation (e.g.
ultrasonography, MRI) is always better. That should not undermine the
benefits of X-ray screening such as routine mammograms to help early
detection of cancer.
References:
Berrington de Gonzalez, A and Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic
X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. The Lancet. 363,
345-351. January, 2004.
| Article reviewed by: |
Dr. Tamer Fouad, M.D.
|
|
|
|
|