Lung-cancer reduction from smoking cessation and radon remediation: a preliminary cost-analysis in Northamptonshire, UK

A Mixed Methods Population Health Approach to Explore Radon-Induced Lung Cancer Risk Perception in Canada

BACKGROUND

Radon is a predominant indoor air pollutant and second leading cause of lung cancer in radon-prone areas. Despite the gravity of the health risk, residents in Canada have inadequate perception and taken minimal protective actions. Better perception of a risk motivates people to take preventive measures. Scholarship about radon health risk perception is lacking in Canada. We applied a mixed methods population health approach to explore the determinants shaping perception and actions of a resident population in Canada.

METHODS

We conducted mixed surveys (n = 557) and qualitative bilingual interviews (n = 35) with both homeowners and tenants of Ottawa-Gatineau areas. The study explored residents' risk perception and adaptations factors. Descriptive, correlational and regression analyses described and established associations between quantitative variables. Thematic, inductive analyses identified themes in the qualitative data. A mixed methods analysis triangulated both results to draw a holistic perception of the health risk.

RESULTS

Residents' quantitative perceptions of radon health risk, smoking at home, synergistic risk perception, social influence and care for family were associated significantly with their intention to test for radon levels in their home, actual testing and mitigation. These results were explained further with the qualitative findings. Residents who had dual cognitive and emotional awareness of the risk were motivated enough to take preventive actions. Caring for family, knowing others who contracted lung cancer and financial capability were enablers, whereas lack of awareness and homeownership, cost of mitigation and stigma were obstacles to preventive actions. We also explored the dual subjective and objective aspects of risk perception that are influenced by micro- and macro-level determinants.

CONCLUSIONS

Inducing protective action to reduce risk requires comprehensive population-level interventions considering dual perceptions of the risk that can modify the risk determinants. Future research can explore the dual aspects of risk perception and unequal distribution of the risk factors.

Future initiatives to reduce lung cancer incidence in the United Kingdom: smoking cessation, radon remediation and the impact of social change

Aims:

Smoking and radon cause lung cancer, with smoking being the more significant risk factor. Although programmes to identify UK houses with raised radon levels and to encourage remedial action started in 1990, uptake has been limited and those most at risk, smokers and young families, are not being reached. The risks from smoking and radon are multiplicative. Public health campaigns have reduced smoking prevalence significantly. Since most radon-induced lung cancers occur in smokers, reducing the number of smokers will reduce the number of radon-induced lung cancers. This article considers the impact of reducing smoking prevalence on the effectiveness of radon remediation programmes, combining this with demographic trends and regional variations to assess implications for future public health.

Methods:

Results on cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation and radon remediation programmes were combined with government figures for smoking prevalence to estimate the number of cancers averted and the cost-effectiveness of such programmes, taking into account demographic changes, including increasing life expectancy. Regional variations in smoking prevalence and smoking cessation programmes were reviewed, comparing these to the geographic variation of radon.

Results:

The continuing impact of smoking cessation programmes in reducing smoking prevalence will reduce the number of radon-induced lung cancers, but with a lag. Smoking cessation programmes are more cost-effective than radon remediation programmes, presenting an additional opportunity to reduce radon risk to smokers. Regional data show no correlation between smoking prevalence and radon levels.

Conclusions:

Reduced smoking prevalence reduces the effectiveness of radon remediation programmes. This, coupled with limited uptake of radon remediation, suggests that radon remediation programmes should be targeted, and that an integrated public health policy for smoking and radon is appropriate. Lack of correlation between smoking prevalence and radon suggests that local assessment of relative priorities for public health strategies, such as the ‘Total Place’ initiative, is appropriate.

Lung cancer risk from radon in Ontario, Canada: how many lung cancers can we prevent?

Purpose

To calculate the burden of lung cancer illness due to radon for all thirty-six health units in Ontario and determine the number of radon-attributable lung cancer deaths that could be prevented.

Methods

We calculated the population attributable risk percent, excess life-time risk ratio, life-years lost, the number of lung cancer deaths due to radon, and the number of deaths that could be prevented if all homes above various cut-points were effectively reduced to background levels.

Results

It is estimated that 13.6 % (95 % CI 11.0, 16.7) of lung cancer deaths in Ontario are attributable to radon, corresponding to 847 (95 % CI 686, 1,039) lung cancer deaths each year, approximately 84 % of these in ever-smokers. If all homes above 200 Bq/m³, the current Canadian guideline, were remediated to background levels, it is estimated that 91 lung cancer deaths could be prevented each year, 233 if remediation was performed at 100 Bq/m³. There was important variation across health units.

Conclusions

Radon is an important contributor to lung cancer deaths in Ontario. A large portion of radon-attributable lung cancer deaths are from exposures below the current Canadian guideline, suggesting interventions that install effective radon-preventive measures into buildings at build may be a good alternative population prevention strategy to testing and remediation. For some health units, testing and remediation may also prevent a portion of radon-related lung cancer deaths. Regional attributable risk estimates can help with local public health resource allocation and decision making.

Establishing a regional reference indoor radon level on the basis of radon survey data

The establishment of national reference levels is a new requirement of the ICRP radiological protection system. For protection against indoor radon exposure measures based on a common national reference level tend to be less effective in regions where the probability of high indoor radon concentrations is relatively low in comparison with the national average. Therefore it makes sense to establish individual indoor radon reference levels for large sub-national regions as well as for urban agglomerations separately. Analysis of indoor radon surveys of the territory, taking into account the type of building, year of construction, building material, floor and other factors influencing indoor radon concentration, provides essential and important data for defining the reference level. For Ekaterinburg, Russia it is suggested to set the reference indoor radon concentration to a level of 70 Bq m(-3) which corresponds to the 90th percentile of radon concentration in a representative group of buildings constructed in the period 1970-89, in which the lowest average indoor radon concentration was observed.

Modeling joint exposures and health outcomes for cumulative risk assessment: the case of radon and smoking

Community-based cumulative risk assessment requires characterization of exposures to multiple chemical and non-chemical stressors, with consideration of how the non-chemical stressors may influence risks from chemical stressors. Residential radon provides an interesting case example, given its large attributable risk, effect modification due to smoking, and significant variability in radon concentrations and smoking patterns. In spite of this fact, no study to date has estimated geographic and sociodemographic patterns of both radon and smoking in a manner that would allow for inclusion of radon in community-based cumulative risk assessment. In this study, we apply multi-level regression models to explain variability in radon based on housing characteristics and geological variables, and construct a regression model predicting housing characteristics using U.S. Census data. Multi-level regression models of smoking based on predictors common to the housing model allow us to link the exposures. We estimate county-average lifetime lung cancer risks from radon ranging from 0.15 to 1.8 in 100, with high-risk clusters in areas and for subpopulations with high predicted radon and smoking rates. Our findings demonstrate the viability of screening-level assessment to characterize patterns of lung cancer risk from radon, with an approach that can be generalized to multiple chemical and non-chemical stressors.