Cited by 273Radiation Dose and ImagingEffects of Radiation ExposureGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment

Brain cancer after radiation exposure from CT examinations of children and young adults: results from the EPI-CT cohort study

Open access
Hauptmann, Michael, Byrnes, Graham, Cardis, Elisabeth, Bernier, Marie-Odile, Blettner, Maria, Dabin, Jérémie, Engels, Hilde, Istad, Tore S +21 more·2023·The Lancet Oncology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The European EPI-CT study aims to quantify cancer risks from CT examinations of children and young adults. Here, we assess the risk of brain cancer. METHODS: We pooled data from nine European countries for this cohort study. Eligible participants had at least one CT examination before age 22 years documented between 1977 and 2014, had no previous diagnosis of cancer or benign brain tumour, and were alive and cancer-free at least 5 years after the first CT. Participants were identified through the Radiology Information System in 276 hospitals. Participants were linked with national or regional registries of cancer and vital status, and eligible cases were patients with brain cancers according to WHO International Classification of Diseases for Oncology. Gliomas were analysed separately to all brain cancers. Organ doses were reconstructed using historical machine settings and a large sample of CT images. Excess relative risks (ERRs) of brain cancer per 100 mGy of cumulative brain dose were calculated with linear dose-response modelling. The outcome was the first reported diagnosis of brain cancer after an exclusion period of 5 years after the first electronically recorded CT examination. FINDINGS: We identified 948 174 individuals, of whom 658 752 (69%) were eligible for our study. 368 721 (56%) of 658 752 participants were male and 290 031 (44%) were female. During a median follow-up of 5·6 years (IQR 2·4-10·1), 165 brain cancers occurred, including 121 (73%) gliomas. Mean cumulative brain dose, lagged by 5 years, was 47·4 mGy (SD 60·9) among all individuals and 76·0 mGy (100·1) among people with brain cancer. A significant linear dose-response relationship was observed for all brain cancers (ERR per 100 mGy 1·27 [95% CI 0·51-2·69]) and for gliomas separately (ERR per 100 mGy 1·11 [0·36-2·59]). Results were robust when the start of follow-up was delayed beyond 5 years and when participants with possibly previously unreported cancers were excluded. INTERPRETATION: The observed significant dose-response relationship between CT-related radiation exposure and brain cancer in this large, multicentre study with individual dose evaluation emphasises careful justification of paediatric CTs and use of doses as low as reasonably possible. FUNDING: EU FP7; Belgian Cancer Registry; La Ligue contre le Cancer, L'Institut National du Cancer, France; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan; German Federal Ministry of Education and Research; Worldwide Cancer Research; Dutch Cancer Society; Research Council of Norway; Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear, Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain; US National Cancer Institute; UK National Institute for Health Research; Public Health England.

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/s1470-2045(22)00655-6

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • These findings may be an artifact of the generally short follow-up of this cohort (7.8 years on average) and of the heterogeneous distribution of age at exposure, attained age and time since exposure across countries.

    “These findings, also noted for brain cancers31, within EPI-CT, may be an artifact of the generally short follow-up of this cohort (7.8 years on average) and of the heterogeneous distribution of age at exposure, attained age and time since exposure across countries.”

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

Authors
Hauptmann, M., Byrnes, G., Cardis, E., Bernier, M.-O., Blettner, M., Dabin, J., Engels, H., Istad, T. S., Johansen, C., Kaijser, M., Kjaerheim, K., Journy, N., Meulepas, J. M., Moissonnier, M., Ronckers, C., Thierry-Chef, I., Le Cornet, L., Jahnen, A., Pokora, R., Bosch de Basea, M., Figuerola, J., Maccia, C., Nordenskjold, A., Harbron, R. W., Lee, C., Simon, S. L., Berrington de Gonzalez, A., Schüz, J., & Kesminiene, A.
Affiliations
  • Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane (DE)
  • Centre international de recherche sur le cancer (FR)
  • Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
  • Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (FR)
  • University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Belgian Nuclear Research Centre (BE)
  • Norwegian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (NO)
  • Rigshospitalet (DK)
  • Karolinska University Hospital (SE)
  • Université Paris-Sud (FR)
  • The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Hauptmann, Michael
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-01
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
45-53
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4310769135
Cited by
273
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 85 · 2025: 82 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 1
FWCI
26.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Oncology (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
  • World Health Organization
  • Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (2012–02–21–01)
  • International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska, Fairbanks
  • Ligue Contre le Cancer (PRE09/MOB)
  • Seventh Framework Programme (269912-EPI-CT)
  • KWF Kankerbestrijding
  • Worldwide Cancer Research (12–1155)
  • Generalitat de Catalunya
  • National Cancer Institute
  • Agència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca
  • Europäische Kommission
  • Institut National Du Cancer (2011–1-PL-SHS-01-IRSN-1)
  • Public Health England
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (02NUK016A, 02NUK016B, 02NUK016CX)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Norges Forskningsråd (209094)
  • Newcastle University
  • Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (SRO/3347/2015/227·06)
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 › Genetics › Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
brain cancer, young adults, glioma, radiation-induced cancer risk, linear dose-response relationship, excess relative risk, cancer risk assessment, low-dose radiation, diagnostic imaging safety, cancer registry linkage, hospital-based cohort
MeSH terms
Radiation Exposure, Adult, Brain Neoplasms, Child, Female, Glioma, Humans, Male, Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced, Radiation Dosage, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Cohort Studies, 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