Cited by 16Radiation Therapy and DosimetryEffects of Radiation ExposureRadiation Dose and Imaging

Benchmarking risk predictions and uncertainties in the NSCR model of GCR cancer risks with revised low let risk coefficients

Open access
Cucinotta, Francis A., Cacao, Eliedonna, Kim, Myung-Hee Y., Saganti, Premkumar B.·2020·Life Sciences in Space Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

We report on the contributions of model factors that appear in projection models to the overall uncertainty in cancer risks predictions for exposures to galactic cosmic ray (GCR) in deep space, including comparisons with revised low LET risks coefficients. Annual GCR exposures to astronauts at solar minimum are considered. Uncertainties in low LET risk coefficients, dose and dose-rate modifiers, quality factors (QFs), space radiation organ doses, non-targeted effects (NTE) and increased tumor lethality at high LET compared to low LET radiation are considered. For the low LET reference radiation parameters we use a revised assessment of excess relative risk (ERR) and excess additive risk (EAR) for radiation induced cancers in the Life-Span Study (LSS) of the Atomic bomb survivors that was recently reported, and also consider ERR estimates for males from the International Study of Nuclear Workers (INWORKS). For 45-y old females at mission age the risk of exposure induced death (REID) per year and 95% confidence intervals is predicted as 1.6% [0.71, 1.63] without QF uncertainties and 1.64% [0.69, 4.06] with QF uncertainties. However, fatal risk predictions increase to 5.83% [2.56, 9.7] based on a sensitivity study of the inclusion of non-targeted effects on risk predictions. For males a comparison using LSS or INWORKS lead to predictions of 1.24% [0.58, 3.14] and 2.45% [1.23, 5.9], respectively without NTEs. The major conclusion of our report is that high LET risk prediction uncertainties due to QFs parameters, NTEs, and possible increase lethality at high LET are dominant contributions to GCR uncertainties and should be the focus of space radiation research.

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 · 10.1016/j.lssr.2020.07.008

Cites

9 of 9 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?

  • The uncertainties of cancer risk assessment are still unacceptably high.

    “The uncertainties of cancer risk assessment are still unacceptably high25.”

    From Towards sustainable human space exploration—priorities for radiation research to quantify and mitigate radiation risks (2023) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Conclusions (page unavailable) identify major remaining uncertainties in predicting cancer risk from high-LET space radiation and call for studies to reduce them. The claim broadens this to cancer risk assessment generally and calls the uncertainties “unacceptably high”; the same section says uncertainties for low-LET total solid cancer and leukemia risks are now modest. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Circulatory disease risk would add 15-35% of the total lifetime fatality risk over the cancer risk alone, dependent on age at exposure and sex.

    “predicted that circulatory disease risk would add 15-35% (dependent on age at exposure and sex) of the total lifetime fatality risk over the cancer risk alone (Cucinotta et al., 2017;Cucinotta et al., 2013b;Cucinotta et al., 2020).”

    From A proposed change to astronaut exposures limits is a giant leap backwards for radiation protection (2021) · cites this paper as Cucinotta et al., 2020

    The Abstract and Model Development section discuss projected cancer mortality, but neither reports a circulatory-disease contribution to lifetime fatality risk. Searches for circulatory and cardiovascular disease and the 15–35% figure found no passage addressing that comparison in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Cucinotta FA, Schimmerling W, Wilson JW, Badhwar GD, Peterson LE, Saganti P, Dicello JF. Space radiation cancer risks and uncertainties for Mars missions. Radiat Res. 2001;156: 682-688.
  2. Cucinotta FA, To K, Cacao E. Predictions of Space Radiation Fatality Risk for Exploration Missions. Life Sci Space Res. 2017; 13, 1-11.
  3. NRC. Technical evaluation of the NASA model for cancer risk to astronauts due to space radiation. National Research Council. The National Academies Press: Washington DC; 2012.
  4. Cucinotta, F.A., Alp, M., Rowedder B., Kim, M.Y.: Safe days in space with acceptable uncertainty from space radiation exposure. Life Sci Space Res. 2015; 2: 54-69.
  5. Cacao, E., Hada, M., Saganti, P.B., George, K.A., Cucinotta, F.A.: Relative biological effectiveness of HZE particles for chromosomal aberrations and other surrogate cancer risk endpoints. PLoS One 2016; 11(4): e0153998.
  6. Grant EJ, Brenner A, Sugiyama H, Sakata R, Sakadane A, et al. Solid cancer incidence among the Life-span study of atomic-bomb survivors: 1958-2009. Radiat Res. 2017; 187: 513-537.
  7. Richardson DB, Cardis E, Daniels RD, Gillies M, O'Hagan JA, et al., Risk of cancer from occupational exposure to ionizing radiation: retrospective cohort study of workers in Frances, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS). Brit Med J. 2015; 351: h5359.
  8. Richardson DB, Cardis E, Daniels RD, Gillies M, Haylock R, et al. Site-specific solid cancer mortality after exposure to ionizing radiation. Epidemiology 2018; 29: 31-40.
  9. Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, Nishi N, Soda M, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiat Res. 2007; 168: 1-64.
  10. BEIR VII. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. National Academy of Sciences Committee on the Biological Effects of Radiation. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences Press; 2006.
  11. Cucinotta FA, Cacao E, Alp M. Space radiation quality factors and the delta-ray dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor. Health Phys. 2016; 110: 262-266.
  12. Cucinotta FA, Cacao E. Non-targeted effects models predict significantly higher mars mission cancer risk than targeted effects model. Scientific Rep. 2017; 7: 1832.
  13. Hoel DG. Comments on the DDREF estimate of the BEIR VII committee. Health Phys. 25; 108: 351-356.
  14. Chang PY, Cucinotta FA, Bjornstad KA, Bakke J, Rosen CJ, Du N, Fairchild DG, Cacao E, Blakely EA. Harderian gland tumorigenesis: Low-dose and LET response. Radiat Res. 2016; 185, 449 -460.
  15. Kadhim M, Salomaa S, Wright E, Hildenbrandt G, Belyakov OV, Prise KM, et al. Non-targeted effects of ionizing radiation-implications for low dose risk. Mutat Res. 2013; 752: 84-98.
  16. Illa-Bochaca I, Ouyang H, Tang J, Sebastiano C, Mao JH, Costes SV, et al.. Densely ionizing radiation acts via the microenvironment to promote aggressive Trp53 null mammary carcinomas. Cancer Res. 2014; 74, 7137-7148.
  17. Morgan, W. F. Non-targeted and delayed effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. I. Radiation-induced genomic instability and bystander effects in vitro. Radiat Res. 2003; 159, 567-580.
  18. Maxwell, C. A. et al. Targeted and nontargeted effects of ionizing radiation that impact genomic instability. Cancer Res. 2008; 68, 8304-8311.
  19. Belyakov, O. V. et al. Biological effects in unirradiated human tissue induced by radiation damage up to 1 mm away. Proc National Acad Sci USA. 2005; 102: 14203-14208.
  20. Gailard S, et al. Propagation distance of the alpha-particle induced bystander effect: the role of nuclear traversal and gap junction communication. Radiat Res 2009; 171, 513-520.
  21. Nagasawa H, et al. Role of homologous recombination in the alpha-particle- induced bystander effect for sister chromatid exchanges and chromosomal aberrations. Radiat Res. 2005; 164, 141-147.
  22. Hada M, Chappell, LJ, Wang M, George KA, Cucinotta FA. On the induction of chromosomal aberrations at fluence of less than one HZE particle per cell nucleus. Radiat Res. 2014; 182, 368-379.
  23. Bettega D, Calzoolari P, NorisChiorda G, Tallone-Lombardi. Transformation of C3H10T1/2 cells with 4.3 MeV α particles at low doses: effects of single and fractionated doses. Radiat Res 1992; 131: 66-71.
  24. Li Y, Wang M, Carra C, Cucinotta FA. Modularized Smad-regulated TGFβ Signaling Pathway. Mathematical Biosci. 2012; 240: 187-200.
  25. Wilson JW, Townsend LW, Shinn JL, Cucinotta FA, Costen RC, Badavi FF, Lamkin SL. Galactic cosmic ray transport methods: Past, present, and future. Adv. Space Res. 1994;14: 841-852.
  26. Cucinotta FA, Kim MY, Schneider I, Hassler DM. Description of light ion production cross sections and fluxes on the Mars surface using the QMSFRG model. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2007; 46:101-106.
  27. Dicello JF, Christian A, Cucinotta FA, Gridley DS, Kathirithhamby R, Mann J, et al. In vivo mammary tumorigenesis in the Sprague-Dawley rat and microdosimetric correlates. Phys Med Biol. 2004; 49: 3817-3830.
  28. Weil MM, Ray FA, Genik PC, Yu Y, McCarthy M, Fallgren CM, et al. Effects of 28 Si ions, 56 Fe ions, and protons on the induction of murine acute myeloid leukemia and hepatocellular carcinoma. PLoS Ond. 2014;9(8): e104819.
  29. Grahn D, Lombard LS, Carnes BA. The comparative tumorigenic effects of fission neutrons and Cobalt-60  rays in B6CF1 mouse. Radiat Res. 1992;129:19- 36.
  30. Imaoka T, Nishimura, Kakinuma S, Hatano Y, Ohmachi Y, Yoshinaga S, et al. High relative biological effectiveness of carbon ion irradiation on induction of rat mammary carcinoma and its lack of H-ras and Tp53 mutations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biophys. 2007;69: 194-203.
  31. Trani D, Datta K, Doiron K, Kallakury B, Fornace Jr AJ. Enhanced intestinal tumor multiplicity and grade in vivo after HZE exposure: mouse models for space radiation risk estimates. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2010;49: 389-396.
  32. Datta K, Suman S, Kallakury BV, Fornace Jr AJ. Heavy ion radiation exposure triggered higher intestinal tumor frequency and greater -catenin activation than  radiation in APC Min/+ mice. PLoS ONE. 2013;8: e59295.
  33. Illa-Bochaca I, Ouyang H, Tang J, Sebastiano C, Mao JH, Costes SV, et al. Densely ionizing radiation acts via the microenvironment to promote aggressive Trp53 null mammary carcinomas. Cancer Res. 2014;74(23): 7137-7148.
  34. Wang X, Farris AB, Wang P, Zhang X, Wang H, Wang Y. Relative Effectiveness at 1 Gy after acute and fractionated exposures of heavy ions with different linear energy transfer for lung tumorigenesis. Radiat Res. 2015; 18(2): 233-239.
  35. NAS, National Academy of Sciences Space Science Board. Report of the task group on the biological effects of space radiation: Radiation hazards to crews on interplanetary missions. The National Academies Press: Washington DC, 1996.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cucinotta, F. A., Cacao, E., Kim, M.-H. Y., & Saganti, P. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
  • Prairie View A&M University (US)
Corresponding author
Cucinotta, Francis A.
Venue
Life Sciences in Space Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
27
Pages
64-73
ISSN
2214-5524 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3044827921
Cited by
16
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Life Sciences in Space Research (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiation Dose and Imaging
Keywords
galactic cosmic rays, space radiation, radiation-induced cancer risk, quality factor, non-targeted effects, Life Span Study, benchmarking
MeSH terms
Cosmic Radiation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced, Risk, Space Flight, Risk Assessment, Benchmarking, Uncertainty

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