Technical Report No. 6-81

Life Span Study Report 9. Part 3. Tumor Registry data, Nagasaki 1959-78

Beebe GW, Kato H, Land CE

 

Editor’s note:

The following journal articles, based on this ABCC technical report, were published in the scientific literature:
Wakabayashi T, Kato H, Ikeda T, Schull WJ: Studies of the mortality of A-bomb survivors, Report 7. Part III. Incidence of cancer in 1959-78, based on the Tumor Registry, Nagasaki. Radiat Res 93:112-46, 1983
Wakabayashi T, Kato H, Ikeda T, Schull WJ: Studies of the mortality of A-bomb survivors, Report 7. Part III. Incidence of cancer in 1959-78, based on the Tumor Registry data, Nagasaki (Part 1). Hiroshima Igaku [J Hiroshima Med Assoc] 36:1011-23, 1983 (in Japanese)
Wakabayashi T, Kato H, Ikeda T, Schull WJ: Studies of the mortality of A-bomb survivors, Report 7. Part III. Incidence of cancer in 1959-78, based on the Tumor Registry data, Nagasaki (Part 2); Appendix Tables. Hiroshima Igaku [J Hiroshima Med Assoc] 36:1171-7, 1983 (in Japanese)

 

Summary

The incidence of malignant tumors in the RERF Life Span Study (LSS) sample in Nagasaki as revealed by the Nagasaki Tumor Registry (Registry) has been investigated for the period 1959-78.

No exposure status bias in data collection has been revealed. Neither method of diagnosis, reporting hospitals, nor the frequency of doubtful cases differ by exposure dose. Thus, the effect of a bias, if one exists, must be small and should not affect the interpretation of the results obtained in the present analysis.

The risk of radiogenic cancer definitely increases with radiation dose for leukemia, cancer of the breast, lung, stomach, and thyroid, and suggestively so for cancer of the colon and urinary tract and multiple myeloma. However, there is no increase as yet for cancer of the esophagus, liver, gall bladder, uterus, ovary, and salivary gland, or for malignant lymphoma.

For fatal cancers, these results strengthen those of the recent analysis of mortality based on death certificates on the same LSS cohort. In general, the relative risks based on incidence (that is, on Registry data) are either the same or slightly higher than those based on mortality for the same years; however, the absolute risk estimates (excess cancer per million person-year per rad) are far higher.

Since atomic bomb radiation in Nagasaki consisted essentially of gamma rays, the present report provides a good opportunity to examine the shape of dose-response curve for gamma exposure. A linear model fits best or at least as well as a linear-quadratic model for many cancers other than leukemia, specifically, cancer of the breast, lung, stomach, and thyroid, where the fit of the quadratic model is not good. This is in contrast to leukemia where the quadratic model fits better than either the linear or the linear-quadratic model. Statistically, however, one cannot actually distinguish one model from another. Further data are obviously necessary.

 

Editor’s note:

The following components of this report contain data on communicable disease frequencies, allergies, malignancies, and many other symptoms that may be of interest from a public health standpoint.

 

List of Tables

1. Site-specific & age-adjusted incidence rates, Nagasaki Tumor Registry & other registries in Japan
2. Number of subjects and person-years in Tumor Registry data, 1959-78
3. Cancer of all sites by hospital & exposure status
4. Cancer of all sites by method of ascertainment & exposure status
5. Cancer of all sites by method of ascertainment, exposure status, & period
6. Excess incidence per 10⁶ PYR and 90% confidence interval by period for selected cancer sites
7. Cancer of thyroid and prostate by type and dose
8. Excess incidence per 10⁶ PYR by age ATB and sex for selected cancer sites
9. Fit of three models to dose-response curve of the incidence of specific cancer
10. Estimated number of excess cancer cases and its proportion to all cancer cases

 

List of Figures

1. Relative risk (100+ rad vs 0 rad) and 90% confidence interval for selected cancer sites by method of ascertainment, 1959-78
2. Relative risk (100+ rad vs 0 rad) and 90% confidence interval by cancer site, all methods of ascertainment combined, 1959-78
3. Age-sex adjusted average annual incidence rate by dose for selected cancer sites, all methods of ascertainment, 1959-78
4. Relative risk by method of ascertainment and period for selected cancer sites, 1959-78
5. Excess cases per 10⁶ PYR and 90% confidence interval for selected cancer sites by method of ascertainment, 1959-78
6. Observed and expected average annual incidence of selected cancer sites, 1959-78