Examining temporal effects on cancer risk in the international nuclear workers' study

Minimum latency effects for cancer associated with exposures to radiation or other carcinogens

BACKGROUND

In estimating radiation-associated cancer risks a fixed period for the minimum latency is often assumed. Two empirical latency functions have been used to model latency, continuously increasing from 0. A stochastic biologically-based approach yields a still more plausible way of describing latency and can be directly estimated from clinical data.

METHODS

We derived the parameters for a stochastic biologically-based model from tumour growth data for various cancers, and least-squares fitted the two types of empirical latency function to the stochastic model-predicted cumulative probability.

RESULTS

There is wide variation in growth rates among tumours, particularly slow for prostate and thyroid cancer and particularly fast for leukaemia. The slow growth rate for prostate and thyroid tumours implies that the number of tumour cells required for clinical detection cannot greatly exceed 106. For all tumours, both empirical latency functions closely approximated the predicted biological model cumulative probability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results, illustrating use of a stochastic biologically-based model using clinical data not tied to any particular carcinogen, have implications for estimating latency associated with any mutagen. They apply to tumour growth in general, and may be useful for example, in planning screenings for cancer using imaging techniques.

Cancer mortality after low dose exposure to ionising radiation in workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS): cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of protracted low dose, low dose rate exposure to ionising radiation on the risk of cancer.

DESIGN

Multinational cohort study.

SETTING

Cohorts of workers in the nuclear industry in France, the UK, and the US included in a major update to the International Nuclear Workers Study (INWORKS).

PARTICIPANTS

309 932 workers with individual monitoring data for external exposure to ionising radiation and a total follow-up of 10.7 million person years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Estimates of excess relative rate per gray (Gy) of radiation dose for mortality from cancer.

RESULTS

The study included 103 553 deaths, of which 28 089 were due to solid cancers. The estimated rate of mortality due to solid cancer increased with cumulative dose by 52% (90% confidence interval 27% to 77%) per Gy, lagged by 10 years. Restricting the analysis to the low cumulative dose range (0-100 mGy) approximately doubled the estimate of association (and increased the width of its confidence interval), as did restricting the analysis to workers hired in the more recent years of operations when estimates of occupational external penetrating radiation dose were recorded more accurately. Exclusion of deaths from lung cancer and pleural cancer had a modest effect on the estimated magnitude of association, providing indirect evidence that the association was not substantially confounded by smoking or occupational exposure to asbestos.

CONCLUSIONS

This major update to INWORKS provides a direct estimate of the association between protracted low dose exposure to ionising radiation and solid cancer mortality based on some of the world's most informative cohorts of radiation workers. The summary estimate of excess relative rate solid cancer mortality per Gy is larger than estimates currently informing radiation protection, and some evidence suggests a steeper slope for the dose-response association in the low dose range than over the full dose range. These results can help to strengthen radiation protection, especially for low dose exposures that are of primary interest in contemporary medical, occupational, and environmental settings.

Ionizing radiation and solid cancer mortality among US nuclear facility workers

BACKGROUND

The risk of solid cancers from low-level protracted ionizing radiation is not well characterized. Nuclear workers provide valuable information on the effects of ionizing radiation in contemporary exposure scenarios relevant to workers and the public.

METHODS

We evaluated the association between penetrating ionizing radiation exposure and solid cancer mortality among a pooled cohort of nuclear workers in the USA, with extended follow-up to examine cancers with long latencies. This analysis includes 101 363 workers from five nuclear facilities, with 12 069 solid cancer deaths between 1944 and 2016. The association between cumulative equivalent dose measured in sieverts (Sv) and solid cancer subtypes were modelled as the excess relative rate per Sv (ERR Sv-1) using Cox regression.

RESULTS

For the association between ionizing radiation exposure and all solid cancer mortality we observed an elevated rate (ERR Sv-1=0.19; 95% CI: -0.10, 0.52), which was higher among a contemporary sub-cohort of workers first hired in 1960 or later (ERR Sv-1= 2.23; 95% CI: 1.13, 3.49). Similarly, we observed an elevated rate for lung cancer mortality (ERR Sv-1= 0.65; 95% CI: 0.09, 1.30) that was higher among contemporary hires (ERR Sv-1= 2.90; 95% CI: 1.00, 5.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Although concerns remain about confounding, measurement error and precision, this analysis strengthens the evidence base indicating there are radiogenic risks for several solid cancer types.

Mortality from Leukemia, Cancer and Heart Disease among U.S. Nuclear Power Plant Workers, 1957-2011

BACKGROUND

The aim of the Million Person Study (MPS) of Low Dose Health Effects is to examine the level of radiation risk for chronic exposures received gradually over time and not acutely as was the case for the Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Nuclear power plant (NPP) workers comprise nearly 15 percent of the MPS. Leukemia, selected cancers, Parkinson's disease, ischemic heart disease (IHD) and other causes of death are evaluated.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Radiation Exposure Information and Reporting System (REIRS) and the Landauer, Inc. dosimetry databases identified 135,193 NPP workers first monitored 1957-1984. Annual personal dose equivalents [Hp(10)] were available for each worker. Radiation records from all places of employment were sought. Vital status was determined through 2011. Mean absorbed doses to red bone marrow (RBM), esophagus, lung, colon, brain and heart were estimated by adjusting the recorded Hp(10) for each worker by scaling factors, accounting for exposure geometry and energy of the incident gamma radiation. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated. Radiation risks were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Nearly 50% of workers were employed for more than 20 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 30.2 y. Overall, 29,076 total deaths occurred, 296 from leukemia other than chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 3,382 from lung cancer, 140 from Parkinson's disease and 5,410 from IHD. The mean dose to RBM was 37.9 mGy (maximum 1.0 Gy; percent >100 mGy was 9.2%), 43.2 mGy to lung, 43.7 mGy to colon, 33.2 mGy to brain, and 43.9 mGy to heart. The SMRs (95% CI) were 1.06 (0.94;1.19) for leukemia other than CLL, 1.10 (1.07;1.14) for lung cancer, 0.90 (0.76;1.06) for Parkinson's disease, and 0.80 (0.78; 0.82) for IHD. The excess relative risk (ERR) per 100 mGy for leukemia other than CLL was 0.15 (90% CI 0.001; 0.31). For all solid cancers the ERR per 100 mGy (95% CI) was 0.01 (-0.03; 0.05), for lung cancer -0.04 (-0.11; 0.02), for Parkinson's disease 0.24 (-0.02; 0.50), and for IHD -0.01 (-0.06; 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged exposure to radiation increased the risk of leukemia other than CLL among NPP workers. There was little evidence for a radiation-association for all solid cancers, lung cancer or ischemic heart disease. Increased precision will be forthcoming as the different cohorts within the MPS are combined, such as industrial radiographers and medical radiation workers who were assembled and evaluated in like manner.

Risk of cancer associated with low-dose radiation exposure: comparison of results between the INWORKS nuclear workers study and the A-bomb survivors study

The Life Span Study (LSS) of Japanese atomic bomb survivors has served as the primary basis for estimates of radiation-related disease risks that inform radiation protection standards. The long-term follow-up of radiation-monitored nuclear workers provides estimates of radiation-cancer associations that complement findings from the LSS. Here, a comparison of radiation-cancer mortality risk estimates derived from the LSS and INWORKS, a large international nuclear worker study, is presented. Restrictions were made, so that the two study populations were similar with respect to ages and periods of exposure, leading to selection of 45,625 A-bomb survivors and 259,350 nuclear workers. For solid cancer, excess relative rates (ERR) per gray (Gy) were 0.28 (90% CI 0.18; 0.38) in the LSS, and 0.29 (90% CI 0.07; 0.53) in INWORKS. A joint analysis of the data allowed for a formal assessment of heterogeneity of the ERR per Gy across the two studies (P = 0.909), with minimal evidence of curvature or of a modifying effect of attained age, age at exposure, or sex in either study. There was evidence in both cohorts of modification of the excess absolute risk (EAR) of solid cancer by attained age, with a trend of increasing EAR per Gy with attained age. For leukemia, under a simple linear model, the ERR per Gy was 2.75 (90% CI 1.73; 4.21) in the LSS and 3.15 (90% CI 1.12; 5.72) in INWORKS, with evidence of curvature in the association across the range of dose observed in the LSS but not in INWORKS; the EAR per Gy was 3.54 (90% CI 2.30; 5.05) in the LSS and 2.03 (90% CI 0.36; 4.07) in INWORKS. These findings from different study populations may help understanding of radiation risks, with INWORKS contributing information derived from cohorts of workers with protracted low dose-rate exposures.

ProZES: the methodology and software tool for assessment of assigned share of radiation in probability of cancer occurrence

ProZES is a software tool for estimating the probability that a given cancer was caused by preceding exposure to ionising radiation. ProZES calculates this probability, the assigned share, for solid cancers and hematopoietic malignant diseases, in cases of exposures to low-LET radiation, and for lung cancer in cases of exposure to radon. User-specified inputs include birth year, sex, type of diagnosed cancer, age at diagnosis, radiation exposure history and characteristics, and smoking behaviour for lung cancer. Cancer risk models are an essential part of ProZES. Linking disease and exposure to radiation involves several methodological aspects, and assessment of uncertainties received particular attention. ProZES systematically uses the principle of multi-model inference. Models of radiation risk were either newly developed or critically re-evaluated for ProZES, including dedicated models for frequent types of cancer and, for less common diseases, models for groups of functionally similar cancer sites. The low-LET models originate mostly from the study of atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Risks predicted by these models are adjusted to be applicable to the population of Germany and to different time periods. Adjustment factors for low dose rates and for a reduced risk during the minimum latency time between exposure and cancer are also applied. The development of the methodology and software was initiated and supported by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) taking up advice by the German Commission on Radiological Protection (SSK, Strahlenschutzkommission). These provide the scientific basis to support decision making on compensation claims regarding malignancies following occupational exposure to radiation in Germany.

The Risk of Cancer from CT Scans and Other Sources of Low-Dose Radiation: A Critical Appraisal of Methodologic Quality

INTRODUCTION

Concern exists that radiation exposure from computerized tomography (CT) will cause thousands of malignancies. Other experts share the same perspective regarding the risk from additional sources of low-dose ionizing radiation, such as the releases from Three Mile Island (1979; Pennsylvania USA) and Fukushima (2011; Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan) nuclear power plant disasters. If this premise is false, the fear of cancer leading patients and physicians to avoid CT scans and disaster responders to initiate forced evacuations is unfounded.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This investigation provides a quantitative evaluation of the methodologic quality of studies to determine the evidentiary strength supporting or refuting a causal relationship between low-dose radiation and cancer. It will assess the number of higher quality studies that support or question the role of low-dose radiation in oncogenesis.

METHODS

This investigation is a systematic, methodologic review of articles published from 1975-2017 examining cancer risk from external low-dose x-ray and gamma radiation, defined as less than 200 millisievert (mSv). Following the PRISMA guidelines, the authors performed a search of the PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Methodologies of selected articles were scored using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and a tool identifying 11 lower quality indicators. Manuscript methodologies were ranked as higher quality if they scored no lower than seven out of nine on the NOS and contained no more than two lower quality indicators. Investigators then characterized articles as supporting or not supporting a causal relationship between low-dose radiation and cancer.

RESULTS

Investigators identified 4,382 articles for initial review. A total of 62 articles met all inclusion/exclusion criteria and were evaluated in this study. Quantitative evaluation of the manuscripts' methodologic strengths found 25 studies met higher quality criteria while 37 studies met lower quality criteria. Of the 25 studies with higher quality methods, 21 out of 25 did not support cancer induction by low-dose radiation (P = .0003).

CONCLUSIONS

A clear preponderance of articles with higher quality methods found no increased risk of cancer from low-dose radiation. The evidence suggests that exposure to multiple CT scans and other sources of low-dose radiation with a cumulative dose up to 100 mSv (approximately 10 scans), and possibly as high as 200 mSv (approximately 20 scans), does not increase cancer risk.

Challenging the concept of de novo acute myeloid leukemia: Environmental and occupational leukemogens hiding in our midst

Myeloid neoplasms like acute myeloid leukemia (AML) originate from genomic disruption, usually in a multi-step fashion. Hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell acquisition of abnormalities in vital cellular processes, when coupled with intrinsic factors such as germline predisposition or extrinsic factors such as the marrow microenvironment or environmental agents, can lead to requisite pre-leukemic clonal selection, expansion and evolution. Several of these entities have been invoked as "leukemogens." The known leukemogens are numerous and are found in the therapeutic, occupational and ambient environments, however they are often difficult to implicate for individual patients. Patients treated with particular chemotherapeutic agents or radiotherapy accept a calculated risk of therapy-related AML. Occupational exposures to benzene, dioxins, formaldehyde, electromagnetic and particle radiation have been associated with an increased risk of AML. Although regulatory agencies have established acceptable exposure limits in the workplace, accidental exposures and even ambient exposures to leukemogens are possible. It is plausible that inescapable exposure to non-anthropogenic ambient leukemogens may be responsible for many cases of non-inherited de novo AML. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of leukemogens as they relate to AML, assess to what extent the term "de novo" leukemia is meaningful, and describe the potential to identify and characterize new leukemogens.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Dosimetry Used in Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer

BACKGROUND

A monograph systematically evaluating recent evidence on the dose-response relationship between low-dose ionizing radiation exposure and cancer risk required a critical appraisal of dosimetry methods in 26 potentially informative studies.

METHODS

The relevant literature included studies published in 2006-2017. Studies comprised case-control and cohort designs examining populations predominantly exposed to sparsely ionizing radiation, mostly from external sources, resulting in average doses of no more than 100 mGy. At least two dosimetrists reviewed each study and appraised the strengths and weaknesses of the dosimetry systems used, including assessment of sources and effects of dose estimation error. An overarching concern was whether dose error might cause the spurious appearance of a dose-response where none was present.

RESULTS

The review included 8 environmental, 4 medical, and 14 occupational studies that varied in properties relative to evaluation criteria. Treatment of dose estimation error also varied among studies, although few conducted a comprehensive evaluation. Six studies appeared to have known or suspected biases in dose estimates. The potential for these biases to cause a spurious dose-response association was constrained to three case-control studies that relied extensively on information gathered in interviews conducted after case ascertainment.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential for spurious dose-response associations from dose information appeared limited to case-control studies vulnerable to recall errors that may be differential by case status. Otherwise, risk estimates appeared reasonably free of a substantial bias from dose estimation error. Future studies would benefit from a comprehensive evaluation of dose estimation errors, including methods accounting for their potential effects on dose-response associations.

Issues in Interpreting Epidemiologic Studies of Populations Exposed to Low-Dose, High-Energy Photon Radiation

This article addresses issues relevant to interpreting findings from 26 epidemiologic studies of persons exposed to low-dose radiation. We review the extensive data from both epidemiologic studies of persons exposed at moderate or high doses and from radiobiology that together have firmly established radiation as carcinogenic. We then discuss the use of the linear relative risk model that has been used to describe data from both low- and moderate- or high-dose studies. We consider the effects of dose measurement errors; these can reduce statistical power and lead to underestimation of risks but are very unlikely to bring about a spurious dose response. We estimate statistical power for the low-dose studies under the assumption that true risks of radiation-related cancers are those expected from studies of Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Finally, we discuss the interpretation of confidence intervals and statistical tests and the applicability of the Bradford Hill principles for a causal relationship.

Risk of Leukemia Associated with Protracted Low-Dose Radiation Exposure: Updated Results from the National Registry for Radiation Workers Study

While the link between risk of leukemia and acute radiation exposure is well established for large doses received acutely, uncertainty remains around the translation of these risk estimates to occupational exposure scenarios where the doses are low and accumulated over time, possibly over many years. We present leukemia incidence and mortality radiation risk estimates derived from the National Registry for Radiation Workers, which is a large cohort of occupationally exposed workers from the United Kingdom (UK). The cohort comprised 173,081 workers from the UK who were monitored for occupational exposure to radiation. The cohort was followed for a total of 5.3 million person-years and the incidence and mortality due to leukemia was identified through to the end of follow-up in 2011. Poisson regression was used to investigate the relationship between cumulative radiation dose and leukemia mortality and incidence rates using excess relative risk (ERR) and excess additive risk (EAR) models. The results of this work showed a collective dose of 4,414 person-Sv accumulated by the cohort with an average cumulative dose of 25.5 mSv. Among male workers both the ERR and EAR models showed evidence of increased leukemia risk (excluding chronic lymphatic leukemia) associated with increasing cumulative dose. The ERR was 1.38 per Sv (90% CI: 0.04; 3.24) and EAR was 1.33 per 10,000 person-year-Sv (90% CI: 0.04; 2.89) when a linear model was used. These excess risks were driven by increased risks for chronic myeloid leukemia [ERR/Sv = 6.77 (90% CI: 2.14; 15.44)]. In conclusion, this study provides further evidence that leukemia risks may be increased by low-dose and protracted external radiation exposure. The risks are generally consistent with those observed in the atomic bomb survivor studies, as well as with risk coefficients on which international radiation safety standards, including the dose limits and constraints used to control exposures, are based.

Dependence of the human leukemia risk on the dose and dose rate of continuous irradiation: Modeling study

A biologically motivated dynamical model of the radiogenic leukemia risk assessment (Smirnova, 2015, 2017; Smirnova and Cucinotta, 2018) is applied to the study of the effects of dose rate N and dose D on the excess relative risk ERR for non-CLL leukemia among continuously irradiated humans. In the study, the dose rate N of continuous irradiation is varied from 3×10^-6 to 0.576 Sv/day and the dose D is varied from zero to 2.2 Sv. In the considered range of doses D, the developed model reproduces the linear dependence of ERR on D for the low dose rates N. For higher N, the dependence of ERR on D remains linear for low doses D and becomes nonlinear for higher D, that agrees with empirical observations. In turn, for the considered values of D, the developed model reproduces the practical independence of the ratio ERR/D on N at low N, the inverse dependence of the ratio ERR/D on N at higher N, and the direct dependence of the ratio ERR/D on N at more high N, that also conforms to empirical observations. Additionally, the modeling values of ERR obtained for the scenarios of continuous irradiation corresponding to those for the nuclear industry workers, Chernobyl cleanup workers, and patients treated with radiotherapy, practically, coincide with the respective empirical data. All these modeling findings, along with those obtained in our previous works, demonstrate the predictive power of the developed model and its capability of estimating, on quantitative level, the excess relative risk for non-CLL leukemia among humans exposed to continuous irradiation in wide ranges of doses and dose rates.

Health Impacts of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation: Current Scientific Debates and Regulatory Issues

Health impacts of low-dose ionizing radiation are significant in important fields such as X-ray imaging, radiation therapy, nuclear power, and others. However, all existing and potential applications are currently challenged by public concerns and regulatory restrictions. We aimed to assess the validity of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model of radiation damage, which is the basis of current regulation, and to assess the justification for this regulation. We have conducted an extensive search in PubMed. Special attention has been given to papers cited in comprehensive reviews of the United States (2006) and French (2005) Academies of Sciences and in the United Nations Scientific Committee on Atomic Radiation 2016 report. Epidemiological data provide essentially no evidence for detrimental health effects below 100 mSv, and several studies suggest beneficial (hormetic) effects. Equally significant, many studies with in vitro and in animal models demonstrate that several mechanisms initiated by low-dose radiation have beneficial effects. Overall, although probably not yet proven to be untrue, LNT has certainly not been proven to be true. At this point, taking into account the high price tag (in both economic and human terms) borne by the LNT-inspired regulation, there is little doubt that the present regulatory burden should be reduced.

Dose-response relationships between internally-deposited uranium and select health outcomes in gaseous diffusion plant workers, 1948-2011

OBJECTIVE

To examine dose-response relationships between internal uranium exposures and select outcomes among a cohort of uranium enrichment workers.

METHODS

Cox regression was conducted to examine associations between selected health outcomes and cumulative internal uranium with consideration for external ionizing radiation, work-related medical X-rays and contaminant radionuclides technetium (⁹⁹ Tc) and plutonium (²³⁹ Pu) as potential confounders.

RESULTS

Elevated and monotonically increasing mortality risks were observed for kidney cancer, chronic renal diseases, and multiple myeloma, and the association with internal uranium absorbed organ dose was statistically significant for multiple myeloma. Adjustment for potential confounders had minimal impact on the risk estimates.

CONCLUSION

Kidney cancer, chronic renal disease, and multiple myeloma mortality risks were elevated with increasing internal uranium absorbed organ dose. The findings add to evidence of an association between internal exposure to uranium and cancer. Future investigation includes a study of cancer incidence in this cohort.

Mortality from Circulatory Diseases and other Non-Cancer Outcomes among Nuclear Workers in France, the United Kingdom and the United States (INWORKS)

Positive associations between external radiation dose and non-cancer mortality have been found in a number of published studies, primarily of populations exposed to high-dose, high-dose-rate ionizing radiation. The goal of this study was to determine whether external radiation dose was associated with non-cancer mortality in a large pooled cohort of nuclear workers exposed to low-dose radiation accumulated at low dose rates. The cohort comprised 308,297 workers from France, United Kingdom and United States. The average cumulative equivalent dose at a tissue depth of 10 mm [Hp(10)] was 25.2 mSv. In total, 22% of the cohort were deceased by the end of follow-up, with 46,029 deaths attributed to non-cancer outcomes, including 27,848 deaths attributed to circulatory diseases. Poisson regression was used to investigate the relationship between cumulative radiation dose and non-cancer mortality rates. A statistically significant association between radiation dose and all non-cancer causes of death was observed [excess relative risk per sievert (ERR/Sv) = 0.19; 90% CI: 0.07, 0.30]. This was largely driven by the association between radiation dose and mortality due to circulatory diseases (ERR/Sv = 0.22; 90% CI: 0.08, 0.37), with slightly smaller positive, but nonsignificant, point estimates for mortality due to nonmalignant respiratory disease (ERR/Sv = 0.13; 90% CI: -0.17, 0.47) and digestive disease (ERR/Sv = 0.11; 90% CI: -0.36, 0.69). The point estimate for the association between radiation dose and deaths due to external causes of death was nonsignificantly negative (ERR = -0.12; 90% CI: <-0.60, 0.45). Within circulatory disease subtypes, associations with dose were observed for mortality due to cerebrovascular disease (ERR/Sv = 0.50; 90% CI: 0.12, 0.94) and mortality due to ischemic heart disease (ERR/Sv = 0.18; 90% CI: 0.004, 0.36). The estimates of associations between radiation dose and non-cancer mortality are generally consistent with those observed in atomic bomb survivor studies. The findings of this study could be interpreted as providing further evidence that non-cancer disease risks may be increased by external radiation exposure, particularly for ischemic heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. However, heterogeneity in the estimated ERR/Sv was observed, which warrants further investigation. Further follow-up of these cohorts, with the inclusion of internal exposure information and other potential confounders associated with lifestyle factors, may prove informative, as will further work on elucidating the biological mechanisms that might cause these non-cancer effects at low doses.

Mortality from Circulatory Diseases and other Non-Cancer Outcomes among Nuclear Workers in France, the United Kingdom and the United States (INWORKS)

Positive associations between external radiation dose and non-cancer mortality have been found in a number of published studies, primarily of populations exposed to high-dose, high-dose-rate ionizing radiation. The goal of this study was to determine whether external radiation dose was associated with non-cancer mortality in a large pooled cohort of nuclear workers exposed to low-dose radiation accumulated at low dose rates. The cohort comprised 308,297 workers from France, United Kingdom and United States. The average cumulative equivalent dose at a tissue depth of 10 mm [Hp(10)] was 25.2 mSv. In total, 22% of the cohort were deceased by the end of follow-up, with 46,029 deaths attributed to non-cancer outcomes, including 27,848 deaths attributed to circulatory diseases. Poisson regression was used to investigate the relationship between cumulative radiation dose and non-cancer mortality rates. A statistically significant association between radiation dose and all non-cancer causes of death was observed [excess relative risk per sievert (ERR/Sv) = 0.19; 90% CI: 0.07, 0.30]. This was largely driven by the association between radiation dose and mortality due to circulatory diseases (ERR/Sv = 0.22; 90% CI: 0.08, 0.37), with slightly smaller positive, but nonsignificant, point estimates for mortality due to nonmalignant respiratory disease (ERR/Sv = 0.13; 90% CI: -0.17, 0.47) and digestive disease (ERR/Sv = 0.11; 90% CI: -0.36, 0.69). The point estimate for the association between radiation dose and deaths due to external causes of death was nonsignificantly negative (ERR = -0.12; 90% CI: <-0.60, 0.45). Within circulatory disease subtypes, associations with dose were observed for mortality due to cerebrovascular disease (ERR/Sv = 0.50; 90% CI: 0.12, 0.94) and mortality due to ischemic heart disease (ERR/Sv = 0.18; 90% CI: 0.004, 0.36). The estimates of associations between radiation dose and non-cancer mortality are generally consistent with those observed in atomic bomb survivor studies. The findings of this study could be interpreted as providing further evidence that non-cancer disease risks may be increased by external radiation exposure, particularly for ischemic heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. However, heterogeneity in the estimated ERR/Sv was observed, which warrants further investigation. Further follow-up of these cohorts, with the inclusion of internal exposure information and other potential confounders associated with lifestyle factors, may prove informative, as will further work on elucidating the biological mechanisms that might cause these non-cancer effects at low doses.