Nuclear materials
From
Summary
TBD.
Studies and Reports
- Boice J et al., County mortality and cancer incidence in relation to living near two former nuclear materials processing facilities in Pennsylvania--an update, Health Phys. 96(2):128-37, February 2009.
- Abstract. "A previous county mortality study of populations living near two nuclear materials processing and fabrication facilities in Westmoreland and Armstrong counties in Pennsylvania (1950-1995) was extended through 2004. Noncancer mortality (1996-2004) and cancer incidence (1990-2004) were also evaluated. Among the Westmoreland and Armstrong populations, 10,547 cancer deaths occurred during the period 1996 through 2004 and the relative risk (RR) based on comparisons with six demographically similar counties in western Pennsylvania was 0.97, that is, almost exactly as expected, and no different from our previously published analyses covering the years 1950-1995. The results based on cancer incidence data were very similar to those based on cancer mortality data. Over the years 1990 though 2004, 39,350 incident cancers were reported among residents of Armstrong and Westmoreland counties and the RR based on the six demographically similar counties was 0.99, that is, almost exactly as expected. The number of deaths from nonmalignant conditions was 36,565 and very close to the number expected (RR 1.01). Overall, no increases in cancer or nonmalignant diseases could be attributed to living in counties with nuclear materials processing and fabrication facilities."
- Boice J et al., County mortality and cancer incidence in relation to living near two former nuclear materials processing facilities in Pennsylvania--an update, Health Phys. 96(2):118-27, February 2009.
- Abstract. "Previous studies of cancer incidence among persons living in municipalities within one mile of two nuclear materials processing and fabrication plants in Pennsylvania were extended for the years 1998-2004. It had been shown that mailing addresses for residents of rural areas often did not reflect the actual municipality of residence and, if not corrected, would bias study results. The previous studies had corrected for this bias. Accordingly for the extended study, we obtained mailing addresses from the Pennsylvania Department of Health (PDH) for 866 persons with cancer who presumably lived in one of eight minor civil divisions (MCDs) near or encompassing the former nuclear facilities, designated as Area 1 in previous studies conducted by the PDH. Street addresses were geocoded and local postmasters were asked to place rural delivery addresses, post office boxes and street addresses that could not be geocoded into the correct MCD of actual residence. Over 15% of the mailing addresses were found not to be within the boundaries of the Area 1 municipalities. After the mailing addresses of individuals with cancer were placed in their proper MCD of residence, the number of persons diagnosed with cancer (n = 708) and confirmed to have lived in Area 1 was as expected (728.4) based on cancer incidence rates in the general population of Pennsylvania (SIR 0.97; 95% CI 0.90-1.05). To further evaluate the patterns of cancer rates near these nuclear facilities and the influence of improved reporting and geocoding of addresses over time, analyses were conducted of publicly available cancer incidence data from 1990 through 2004. Based on mailing addresses, a steady decrease in the number of cancers reported in the Area 1 proximal MCDs was seen, in contrast to a steady rise in the number of cancers reported in seven adjacent but more distant MCDs from the nuclear facilities, designated as Area 2. These patterns were attributed to improvements over time in the geocoding of residential mailing addresses coupled with the gradual elimination and replacement of rural delivery addresses with street addresses. The incorrect placement of mailing addresses in residential Area 1 municipalities prior to about 2002 overestimated the number of cancers occurring among residents living in close proximity to the nuclear facilities and, correspondingly, underestimated the number among Area 2 residents. Summing Area 1 and Area 2 data showed that there was no change in cancer rates over time. These results are consistent with previous studies indicating that living in municipalities near the former Apollo-Parks nuclear facilities was not associated with an increase in cancer occurrence."
- Boice JD et al., Cancer mortality among populations residing in counties near the Hanford site, 1950-2000, Health Phys. 2006 May;90(5):431-45.
- Abstract. "A descriptive epidemiologic study of cancer mortality among residents of counties near the Hanford nuclear facility site in Richland, Washington, was conducted. Between 1944 and 1957, radioactive 131I was released into the environment from the Hanford site. Cancer mortality from 1950 through 2000 was evaluated in four counties with the highest estimated exposure to 131I and compared with the cancer mortality experience in five demographically similar counties in Washington State with minimal 131I exposure. Overall, cancer rates in the study counties were slightly below those in the comparison counties [relative risk (RR) 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-0.97], due mainly to a low risk for lung cancer (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.85-0.93). Thyroid cancer (n=33; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.56-1.26), female breast cancer (n=1,233; RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.92-1.06), leukemia other than chronic lymphocytic leukemia (n=492; RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.85-1.06), and childhood leukemia (n=71; RR=1.06; 95% CI 0.78-1.43) were not significantly increased in the exposed counties. Furthermore, there was no evidence that the cancer death rates over time differed between study and comparison counties. Patterns over time of thyroid cancer in particular were similar for exposure and comparison counties. Although based on a geographic correlation design, these data suggest that living near the Hanford site has not increased cancer rates.
- Boice J et al., Cancer mortality in counties near two former nuclear materials processing facilities in Pennsylvania, 1950-1995, Health Phys. 85(6):691-700, December 2003.
- Abstract. "There has been concern that living near nuclear installations might increase the risk of cancer, including childhood leukemia, in surrounding communities. Such concern has been voiced by residents in Armstrong and Westmoreland Counties in Western Pennsylvania in conjunction with the operation of two former nuclear materials processing facilities located in the Apollo borough and the Parks township, just three miles apart. These facilities began operating in 1957 and 1960 and processed uranium and plutonium for commercial and naval applications. To evaluate the possibility of increased cancer rates in communities around the Apollo-Parks nuclear facilities, a cancer incidence and a cancer mortality survey were conducted. The county mortality findings are reported here. Nearly 40,000 cancer deaths occurred in the population residing in Armstrong and Westmoreland Counties from 1950 through 1995. Each of these two study counties was matched for comparison to three control counties in the same region on the basis of age, race, urbanization, and socioeconomic factors available from the 1990 U.S. Census. There were over 77,000 cancer deaths in the 6 control counties during the 45 y studied. Following similar methods used by the National Cancer Institute, Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMRs) were computed as the ratio of observed numbers of cancers in the study and control counties compared to the expected number derived from general population rates of the United States. Relative risks (RR) were computed as the ratios of the SMRs for the study and the control counties. There were no significant increases in the study counties for any cancer when comparisons were made with either the U.S. population or the control counties. In particular, deaths due to cancers of the lung, bone, liver, and kidney were not more frequent in the study counties than in the control counties. These are the cancers of a priori interest given that uranium and/or plutonium might be expected to concentrate in these tissues. Deaths from all cancers combined also were not increased in the study counties, and the RRs of cancer mortality before the facilities operated (1950-1964), during plant operations (1965-1980) and after plant closure (1980-1995) were similar: 0.96, 0.95 and 0.98, respectively. For childhood leukemia mortality, the relative risk comparing the study counties with their controls before plant start-up was 1.02, while during operations (RR 0.81) and after closure (RR 0.57) the relative risks were lower. The study is limited by the correlational approach and the relatively large size of the geographic areas of the counties studied."
- Boice J et al., Cancer incidence in municipalities near two former nuclear materials processing facilities in Pennsylvania, Health Phys. 85(6):678-90, December 2003.
- Abstract. "Because nuclear facilities can release radionuclides into the surrounding environment accidentally or during normal operations, there has been public concern over the possibility of adverse health effects. Two former nuclear materials processing facilities in Armstrong County Pennsylvania have been the focus of such public concern for over 20 y. The Apollo and Parks facilities processed uranium and plutonium fuels for use in nuclear applications. To evaluate the possibility of increased cancer rates in the communities near the Apollo-Parks nuclear processing materials plants, cancer incidence rates were assessed for the years 1993-1997, or nearly 40 y after the plants had begun operation in 1957 and 1960, respectively. The rates of cancer were evaluated among the approximately 17,000 persons living in 1 of 8 municipalities encompassing or near these nuclear sites. Numbers of cancers and mailing addresses (n = 935) were obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of Health. Because mailing addresses in small rural areas do not always reflect actual residences within a municipality, each of 935 addresses was validated (and corrections made when indicated) by contacting area postmasters and using Census Bureau geocoding information, street maps, and aerial photographs. Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIRs) were computed as the ratio of observed numbers of cancers in the study area compared to the expected number derived from general population rates of Pennsylvania. Forty percent of the mailing addresses were found not to be within the boundaries of the study municipalities. After excluding these persons who did not reside in one of the eight municipalities near the Apollo-Parks facilities, 581 cancers remained in contrast to 574.0 expected (SIR 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.93-1.10). Based upon knowledge of the tissues where uranium or plutonium likely would be deposited after intake, cancers of the lung (SIR 0.88), kidney (SIR 1.05), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (SIR 1.10), liver (SIR 0.61), and bone (2 observed vs. 1.19 expected) were carefully evaluated, but no significant excesses were noted at these sites. Cancers of the female breast and thyroid and leukemia also were not significantly increased, as expected since these tissues are not sites where uranium or plutonium would concentrate. Overall, no increase in cancer risk could be attributed to living near the two former nuclear materials processing facilities. However, misleading elevations in cancer risks would have been suggested if mailing addresses had not been corrected to exclude addresses that were not within the boundaries of the municipalities for which population data were available. The study had sufficient power to exclude increased cancer risks of 10% or greater."
