CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 383Radiation Dose and ImagingEffects of Radiation ExposureRadiology practices and education

Projected Lifetime Cancer Risks From Current Computed Tomography Imaging

Open access
Smith-Bindman, Rebecca, Chu, Philip W., Azman Firdaus, Hana, Stewart, Carly, Malekhedayat, Matthew, Alber, Susan, Bolch, Wesley E., Mahendra, Malini +2 more·2025·JAMA Internal Medicine
DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.0505PMC PMC11997853
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Importance: Approximately 93 million computed tomography (CT) examinations are performed on 62 million patients annually in the United States, and ionizing radiation from CT is a known carcinogen. Objective: To project the number of future lifetime cancers in the US population associated with CT imaging in 2023. Design, Setting, and Participants: This risk model used a multicenter sample of CT examinations prospectively assembled between January 2018 and December 2020 from the University of California San Francisco International CT Dose Registry. Data analysis was conducted from October 2023 to October 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Distributions of CT examinations and associated organ-specific radiation doses were estimated by patient age, sex, and CT category and scaled to the US population based on the number of examinations in 2023, quantified by the IMV national survey. Lifetime radiation-induced cancer incidence and 90% uncertainty limits (UL) were estimated by age, sex, and CT category using National Cancer Institute software based on the National Research Council’s Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII models and projected to the US population using scaled examination counts. Results: An estimated 61 510 000 patients underwent 93 000 000 CT examinations in 2023, including 2 570 000 (4.2%) children, 58 940 000 (95.8%) adults, 32 600 000 (53.0%) female patients, and 28 910 000 (47.0%) male patients. Approximately 103 000 (90% UL, 96 400-109 500) radiation-induced cancers were projected to result from these examinations. Estimated radiation-induced cancer risks were higher in children and adolescents, yet higher CT utilization in adults accounted for most (93 000; 90% UL, 86 900-99 600 [91%]) radiation-induced cancers. The most common cancers were lung cancer (22 400 cases; 90% UL, 20 200-25 000 cases), colon cancer (8700 cases; 90% UL, 7800-9700 cases), leukemia (7900 cases; 90% UL, 6700-9500 cases), and bladder cancer (7100 cases, 90% UL, 6000-8500 cases) overall, while in female patients, breast was second most common (5700 cases; 90% UL, 5000-6500 cases). The largest number of cancers was projected to result from abdomen and pelvis CT in adults, reflecting 37 500 of 103 000 cancers (37%) and 30 million of 93 million CT examinations (32%), followed by chest CT (21 500 cancers [21%]; 20 million examinations [21%]). Estimates remained large over a variety of sensitivity analyses, which resulted in a range of 80 000 to 127 000 projected cancers across analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that at current utilization and radiation dose levels, CT examinations in 2023 were projected to result in approximately 103 000 future cancers over the course of the lifetime of exposed patients. If current practices persist, CT-associated cancer could eventually account for 5% of all new cancer diagnoses annually.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.0505

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Currently, computed tomography accounts for roughly 15% of diagnostic examinations yet contributes up to 75% of the overall radiation exposure in major hospitals.

    “Currently, computed tomography accounts for roughly 15% of diagnostic examinations yet contributes up to 75% of the overall radiation exposure in major hospitals.37–39”

    From Computed Tomography Diagnostic Reference Levels Worldwide and in Jordan: Implications for Patient Dose Reduction (2026) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Introduction describes CT as widely performed and as exposing patients to ionizing radiation, while the Conclusions report the number of US CT examinations in 2023. Neither section gives CT’s share of all diagnostic examinations or of radiation exposure in major hospitals. Searches for the 15% and 75% figures and those comparisons found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Smith-Bindman, R., Chu, P. W., Azman Firdaus, H., Stewart, C., Malekhedayat, M., Alber, S., Bolch, W. E., Mahendra, M., Berrington de González, A., & Miglioretti, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
  • Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (US)
ORCID
Venue
JAMA Internal Medicine
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2025-06-01
Volume
185
Issue
6
Pages
710
ISSN
2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.0505
PMC
PMC11997853
OpenAlex
W4409413635
Cited by
358
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 222 · 2025: 136
FWCI
205.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Internal Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Kaiser Permanente
  • University of California, Davis
  • University of California, San Francisco
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA181191)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiation Dose and Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
Keywords
computed tomography, ionizing radiation, radiation-induced cancer, lifetime cancer risk, cancer incidence projections, lung cancer, colon cancer, leukemia, pediatric radiation exposure, CT utilization, risk communication, radiation dose reduction, cancer prevention guidelines
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced, Prospective Studies, Radiation Dosage, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, United States, Incidence, Risk Assessment, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review