Maternal ingestion of radon-222 in drinking water and the absorbed radiation dose to the embryo

Maternal ingestion of high concentrations of radon-222 (Rn-222) in drinking during pregnancy may pose a significant radiation hazard to the developing embryo. The effects of ionizing radiation to the embryo and fetus have been the subject of research, analyses, and the development of a number of radiation dosimetric models for a variety of radionuclides. Currently, essentially all of the biokinetic and dosimetric models that have been developed by national and international radiation protection agencies and organizations recommend calculating the dose to the mother's uterus as a surrogate for estimating the dose to the embryo. Heretofore, the traditional radiation dosimetry models have neither considered the embryo a distinct and rapidly developing entity, the fact that it is implanted in the endometrial layer of the uterus, nor the physiological interchanges that take place between maternal and embryonic cells following the implantation of the blastocyst in the endometrium. The purpose of this research was to propose a new approach and mathematical model for calculating the absorbed radiation dose to the embryo by utilizing a semiclassical treatment of alpha particle decay and subsequent scattering of energy deposition in uterine and embryonic tissue. The new approach and model were compared and contrasted with the currently recommended biokinetic and dosimetric models for estimating the radiation dose to the embryo. The results obtained in this research demonstrate that the estimated absorbed dose for an embryo implanted in the endometrial layer of the uterus during the fifth week of embryonic development is greater than the estimated absorbed dose for an embryo implanted in the uterine muscle on the last day of the eighth week of gestation. This research provides compelling evidence that the recommended methodologies and dosimetric models of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and International Commission on Radiological Protection employed for calculating the radiation dose to the embryo from maternal intakes of radionuclides, including maternal ingestion of Rn-222 in drinking water would result in an underestimation of dose. ^

Information bias and lifetime mortality risks of radiation-induced cancer

Additive and multiplicative models of relative risk were used to measure the effect of cancer misclassification and DS86 random errors on lifetime risk projections in the Life Span Study (LSS) of Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors. The true number of cancer deaths in each stratum of the cancer mortality cross-classification was estimated using sufficient statistics from the EM algorithm. Average survivor doses in the strata were corrected for DS86 random error ($\sigma$ = 0.45) by use of reduction factors. Poisson regression was used to model the corrected and uncorrected mortality rates with covariates for age at-time-of-bombing, age at-time-of-death and gender. Excess risks were in good agreement with risks in RERF Report 11 (Part 2) and the BEIR-V report. Bias due to DS86 random error typically ranged from $-$15% to $-$30% for both sexes, and all sites and models. The total bias, including diagnostic misclassification, of excess risk of nonleukemia for exposure to 1 Sv from age 18 to 65 under the non-constant relative projection model was $-$37.1% for males and $-$23.3% for females. Total excess risks of leukemia under the relative projection model were biased $-$27.1% for males and $-$43.4% for females. Thus, nonleukemia risks for 1 Sv from ages 18 to 85 (DRREF = 2) increased from 1.91%/Sv to 2.68%/Sv among males and from 3.23%/Sv to 4.02%/Sv among females. Leukemia excess risks increased from 0.87%/Sv to 1.10%/Sv among males and from 0.73%/Sv to 1.04%/Sv among females. Bias was dependent on the gender, site, correction method, exposure profile and projection model considered. Future studies that use LSS data for U.S. nuclear workers may be downwardly biased if lifetime risk projections are not adjusted for random and systematic errors. (Supported by U.S. NRC Grant NRC-04-091-02.) ^