JOURNAL DESCRIPTION
The Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety journal ISSN 1024-6177 was founded in January 1956 (before December 30, 1993 it was entitled Medical Radiology, ISSN 0025-8334). In 2018, the journal received Online ISSN: 2618-9615 and was registered as an electronic online publication in Roskomnadzor on March 29, 2018. It publishes original research articles which cover questions of radiobiology, radiation medicine, radiation safety, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine and scientific reviews. In general the journal has more than 30 headings and it is of interest for specialists working in thefields of medicine¸ radiation biology, epidemiology, medical physics and technology. Since July 01, 2008 the journal has been published by State Research Center - Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency. The founder from 1956 to the present time is the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, and from 2008 to the present time is the Federal Medical Biological Agency.
Members of the editorial board are scientists specializing in the field of radiation biology and medicine, radiation protection, radiation epidemiology, radiation oncology, radiation diagnostics and therapy, nuclear medicine and medical physics. The editorial board consists of academicians (members of the Russian Academy of Science (RAS)), the full member of Academy of Medical Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, corresponding members of the RAS, Doctors of Medicine, professor, candidates and doctors of biological, physical mathematics and engineering sciences. The editorial board is constantly replenished by experts who work in the CIS and foreign countries.
Six issues of the journal are published per year, the volume is 13.5 conventional printed sheets, 88 printer’s sheets, 1.000 copies. The journal has an identical full-text electronic version, which, simultaneously with the printed version and color drawings, is posted on the sites of the Scientific Electronic Library (SEL) and the journal's website. The journal is distributed through the Rospechat Agency under the contract № 7407 of June 16, 2006, through individual buyers and commercial structures. The publication of articles is free.
The journal is included in the List of Russian Reviewed Scientific Journals of the Higher Attestation Commission. Since 2008 the journal has been available on the Internet and indexed in the RISC database which is placed on Web of Science. Since February 2nd, 2018, the journal "Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety" has been indexed in the SCOPUS abstract and citation database.
Brief electronic versions of the Journal have been publicly available since 2005 on the website of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal: http://www.medradiol.ru. Since 2011, all issues of the journal as a whole are publicly available, and since 2016 - full-text versions of scientific articles. Since 2005, subscribers can purchase full versions of other articles of any issue only through the National Electronic Library. The editor of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal in accordance with the National Electronic Library agreement has been providing the Library with all its production since 2005 until now.
The main working language of the journal is Russian, an additional language is English, which is used to write titles of articles, information about authors, annotations, key words, a list of literature.
Since 2017 the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety has switched to digital identification of publications, assigning to each article the identifier of the digital object (DOI), which greatly accelerated the search for the location of the article on the Internet. In future it is planned to publish the English-language version of the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety for its development. In order to obtain information about the publication activity of the journal in March 2015, a counter of readers' references to the materials posted on the site from 2005 to the present which is placed on the journal's website. During 2015 - 2016 years on average there were no more than 100-170 handlings per day. Publication of a number of articles, as well as electronic versions of profile monographs and collections in the public domain, dramatically increased the number of handlings to the journal's website to 500 - 800 per day, and the total number of visits to the site at the end of 2017 was more than 230.000.
The two-year impact factor of RISC, according to data for 2017, was 0.439, taking into account citation from all sources - 0.570, and the five-year impact factor of RISC - 0.352.
Issues journals
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 4
Peculiarities of Human Tumor HeLa Cells Surviving and Giving
a Stable Growth After Acute X-ray Irradiation
D.V. Guryev1, 2, A.A. Tsishnatti1, 3, S.M. Rodneva1, Yu.A. Fedotov1, 2,
D.V. Molodtsova1, T.M. Blokhinа1, 2, E.I. Yashkina1, 2,
A.N. Osipov1, 2
1A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia
2N.N. Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Moscow, Russia
3National Research Nuclear University MEPHI, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: D.V. Guryev, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: The evaluation of the repair efficiency of DNA double-strand breaks (DSB), proliferative activity and the yield of cytogenetic disorders in human tumor HeLa cells which survived and gave stable growth after acute irradiation at a dose of 15 Gy.
Material and methods: HeLa human tumor cell line (cervical carcinoma) was used. Cells were irradiated on an X-ray biological installation RUST-M1 (Russia), equipped with two X-ray emitters, at a dose rate of 0.85 Gy / min, a voltage of 200 kV, a total current of 10 mA, and a 1.5 mm Al filter. To obtain clones of surviving cells (HeLaRR), after acute irradiation at a dose of 15 Gy, cell cultures were incubated under standard CO2 incubator conditions (37 °C, 5 % CO2) for several weeks until well proliferating cells were obtained. Immunocytochemical staining of the foci of the phosphorylated H2AX protein (γH2AX) was used to quantitatively evaluate the residual foci of DNA DSB repair. The micronuclei number was assessed in cytochalasin-B cytokinesis-blocked binucleated cells stained with acridine orange with luminescence microscopy. The doubling time of the cell population was analyzed by the cell growth curves obtained by daily cell counting for five days. The cell cycle stages distribution was assessed by flow cytometry using the propidium iodide dye. All quantitative indicators of the studies were processed using the Student’s t-test for independent samples and the Kolmogorov – Smirnov test.
Results: It was revealed that acute irradiation at a high dose leads to the selection of cells with a higher reparative capacity which is confirmed by the low yield of residual foci of DNA DSB repair and MN after testing irradiation at doses of 5 and 10 Gy. A significant decrease in the proliferative activity of cells that survived after acute X-ray irradiation at a dose of 15 Gy was revealed. The doubling time of the population of unirradiated cells at the stage of exponential growth was ~18 hours while for cells that survived after irradiation at a dose of 15 Gy ~42 hours. A change in the cell cycle phases distribution was observed.
Conclusion: Thus, acute irradiation at a high dose leads to the selection of cells with a higher reparative capacity which is confirmed by the low yield of residual γH2AX foci and MN after testing irradiation at doses of 5 and 10 Gy. The decrease in proliferative activity was accompanied by a change in the cell cycle phases distribution.
Keywords: HeLa, γH2AX, micronuclei, proliferation, residual foci, DNA double-strand breaks, Х-ray
For citation: Guryev DV, Tsishnatti AA, Rodneva SM, Fedotov YuA, Molodtsova DV, Blokhinа TM, Yashkina E.I., Osipov AN. Peculiarities of Human Tumor HeLa Cells Surviving and Giving a Stable Growth After Acute X-ray Irradiation. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(4):5–9. (In Russian). DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2022-67-4-5-9
References
1. Dean M., Fojo T., Bates S.. Tumour Stem Cells and Drug Resistance. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2005;5;4:275-284.
2. Alhaddad L., Pustovalova M., Blokhina T., Chuprov-Netochin R., Osipov A.N., Leonov S. IR-Surviving NSCLC Cells Exhibit Different Patterns of Molecular and Cellular Reactions Relating to the Multifraction Irradiation Regimen and p53-Family Proteins Expression. Cancers. 2021;13;11:2669.
3. Pustovalova M., Alhaddad L., Smetanina N., Chigasova A., Blokhina T., Chuprov-Netochin R., et al. The p53–53BP1-Related Survival of A549 and H1299 Human Lung Cancer Cells after Multifractionated Radiotherapy Demonstrated Different Response to Additional Acute X-ray Exposure. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21;9:3342.
4. Almendro V., Marusyk A., Polyak K. Cellular Heterogeneity and Molecular Evolution in Cancer. Annu. Rev. Pathol. 2013;8:277-302.
5. De Sousa E.M.F., Vermeulen L., Fessler E., Medema J.P. Cancer Heterogeneity-a Multifaceted View. EMBO Rep. 2013;14;8:686-695.
6. Butof R., Dubrovska A., Baumann M.. Clinical Perspectives of Cancer Stem Cell Research in Radiation Oncology. Radiother Oncol. 2013;108;3:388-396.
7. Peitzsch C., Kurth I., Kunz-Schughart L., Baumann M., Dubrovska A.. Discovery of the Cancer Stem Cell Related Determinants of Radioresistance. Radiother Oncol. 2013;108;3:378-387.
8. Krause M., Dubrovska A., Linge A., Baumann M. Cancer Stem Cells: Radioresistance, Prediction of Radiotherapy Outcome and Specific Targets for Combined Treatments. Adv. Drug. Deliv. Rev. 2017;109:63-73.
9. Pustovalova M., Alhaddad L., Blokhina T., Smetanina N., Chigasova A., Chuprov-Netochin R., et al. The CD44high Subpopulation of Multifraction Irradiation-Surviving NSCLC Cells Exhibits Partial EMT-Program Activation and DNA Damage Response Depending on Their p53 Status. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22;5:2369.
10. Peitzsch C., Tyutyunnykova A., Pantel K., Dubrovska A. Cancer Stem Cells: The Root of Tumor Recurrence and Metastases. Semin Cancer Biol. 2017;44:10-24.
11. International Atomic Energy Agency. Cytogenetic Analysis for Radiation Dose Assessment: a Manual. Vienna, International Atomic Energy Agency, 2001. 127 p.
12. Siddiqui M.S., Francois M., Fenech M.F., Leifert W.R. Persistent GammaH2AX: A Promising Molecular Marker of DNA Damage and Aging. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2015;766:1-19.
13. Sorokin M., Kholodenko R., Grekhova A., Suntsova M., Pustovalova M., Vorobyeva N., et al. Acquired Resistance to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors May be Linked with the Decreased Sensitivity to X-Ray Irradiation. Oncotarget. 2017;9;4:5111-5124.
14. Babayan N., Vorobyeva N., Grigoryan B., Grekhova A., Pustovalova M., Rodneva S., et al. Low Repair Capacity of DNA Double-Strand Breaks Induced by Laser-Driven Ultrashort Electron Beams in Cancer Cells. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21;24:9488.
15. Banáth J.P., Klokov D., MacPhail S.H., Banuelos C.A., Olive P.L. Residual γH2AX Foci as an Indication of Lethal DNA Lesions. BMC Cancer. 2010;10;1.
16. Raavi V., Perumal V., Paul S.F.D. Potential Application of γ-H2AX as a Biodosimetry Tool for Radiation Triage. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research. 2021;787:108350.
17. Vaurijoux A., Voisin P., Freneau A., Barquinero J.F., Gruel G. Transmission of Persistent Ionizing Radiation-Induced Foci Through Cell Division in Human Primary Cells. Mutat Res. 2017;797-799:15-25.
18. Akudugu J.M., Theron T., Serafin A.M., Bohm L. Influence of DNA Double-Strand Break Rejoining on Clonogenic Survival and Micronucleus Yield in Human Cell Lines. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2004;80;2:93-104.
19. Akudugu J.M., Bohm L. Micronuclei and Apoptosis in Glioma and Neuroblastoma Cell Lines and Role of Other Lesions in the Reconstruction of Cellular Radiosensitivity. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2001;40;4:295-300.
20. Liu C., Nie J., Wang R., Mao W. The Cell Cycle G2/M Block Is an Indicator of Cellular Radiosensitivity. Dose-Response. 2019;17;4:155932581989100.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. All authors made the same contribution to the conception, design, conduction, date analysis of the investigation and the creation of the text of the article.
Financing. The work was conducted by the research state task «Development of approaches to reduce the radioresistance of tumor stem cells» (АААА-А19-119122000097-6).
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 17.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 15.03.2022.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 4
Transmission of Radiation-Induced Genome Instability
from Irradiated Parents to their Offspring
D.S. Oslina, V.L. Rybkina, T.V. Azizova
Southern Urals Biophysics Institute, Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk region, Russia
Contact person: Oslina Darja Sergeevna, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract
Numerous studies allow to suppose a transmission of radiation-induced genome instability from irradiated parents to their offspring on cell, chromosome and molecular genetic level. This review focuses on transmission of radiation-induced genome instability from irradiated parents to their offspring. Data of genome instability in animal experiments and in offspring of occupationally exposed human or human exposed in a radiation accident, and in offspring of parents exposed to radiotherapy are reviewed. The possible mechanisms of lineage transmission of genome instability are discussed. High dose irradiation can lead to DNA damage, changes in methylation patterns and miRNAs expression in parents and their offspring and result in mutations, chromosome aberration and destabilization of genome. Non-coding RNAs (miRNA, piRNA, nsRNA) are supposed to contribute to transgenerational effects, since they can target genes, change chromatin structure and disregulate gene expression.
Keywords: ionizing radiation, transgenerational effects, genetic effects, epigenetic effects
For citation: Oslina DS, Rybkina VL, Azizova TV. Transmission of Radiation-Induced Genome Instability from Irradiated Parents to their Offspring. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(4):10-18. DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2022-67-4-10-18
References
1. Morgan WF. Is there a common mechanism underlying genomic instability, bystander effects and other nontargeted effects of exposure to ionizing radiation? Oncogene. 2003; 22: 7094–7099.
2. Morgan WF, Sowa MB. Non-targeted bystander effects induced by ionizing radiation. Mutation Research. 2007; 616: 159–164.
3. Kovalchuk I, Kovalchuk O. Genome Stability: From Virus to Human Application. Academic Press; 2016. 712 pp.
4. Dugan LC, Bedford JS. Are Chromosomal Instabilities Induced by Exposure of Cultured Normal Human Cells to Low- or High-LET Radiation? Radiat Res. 2003; 159(3): 301–311.
5. Patkin EL, Pavlinova LI, Sofronov GA. Influence of ecotoxicants on mammalian embryogenesis and gametogenesis: epigenetic mechanisms. Interdisciplinary scientific and applied journal "Biosphere". 2013; 5(4): 450–472.
6. Baverstock K. Why do we need a new paradigm in radiobiology? Mutation Research. 2010; 687: 3–6.
7. Little MP, Goodhead DT, Bridges BA, Bouffler SD. Evidence relevant to untargeted and transgenerational effects in the offspring of irradiated parents. Mutation Research. 2013; 753(1): 50–67.
8. Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE). Seventh Report. Chilton, National Radiological Protection Board; 2002. Parents occupationally exposed to radiation prior to the conception of their children. A review of the evidence concerning the incidence of cancer in their children.
9. Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE). Eighth Report. Chilton, National Radiological Protection Board; 2004. Review of pregnancy outcomes following preconceptional exposure to radiation.
10. Slovinská L, Elbertová A, Mišúrová E. Transmission of genome damage from irradiated male rats to their progeny. Mutation Research. 2004: 559; 29–37.
11. Mughal SK, Myazin AE, Zhavoronkov LP, Mughal SK, Myazin AE, Zhavoronkov LP, Rubanovich AV, Dubrova YE. The dose and dose-rate effects of paternal irradiation on transgenerational instability in mice: a radiotherapy connection. PLoS One. 2012; 7(7): 1−5.
12. Glen CD, Dubrova YE. Exposure to anticancer drugs can result in transgenerational genomic instability in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012; 109: 2984–2988.
13. Lomaeva MG, Vasil’eva GV, Fomenko LA, Antipova VN, Gaziev AI, Bezlepkin VG. Increased Genomic Instability in Somatic Cells of the Progeny of Female Mice Exposed to Acute X−Radiation in the Preconceptional Period. Rus J Genetics. 2011; 47(10): 1221.
14. Lomaeva МG, Fomenko LA, Vasil’eva GV, Bezlepkin VG. Tissue-specific Changes in the Polymorphism of Simple Repeats in DNA of the Offspring of Different Sex Born from Irradiated Male or Female Mice. Radiation biology. Radioecology. 2016; 56(2): 149–155.
15. Nefedov IY, Nefedova IY, Palyga GF. Actual aspects of the problem of the genetic consequences of mammalian exposure. Radiation biology. Radioecology. 2000; 40(4); 358–372.
16. Abouzeid AHE, Barber RC, Dubrova YE. The effects of maternal irradiation during adulthood on mutation induction and transgenerational instability in mice. Mutation Research. 2012; 732: 21–25.
17. Somers CM. Expanded simple tandem repeat (ESTR) mutation induction in the male germline: lessons learned from lab mice. Mutation Research. 2006; 598: 35–49.
18. Barber RC, Hickenbotham P, Hatch T, Kelly D, Topchiy N, Almeida GM, Jones GD, Johnson GE, Parry JM, Rothkamm K, Dubrova YE. Radiation-induced transgenerational alterations in genome stability and DNA damage. Oncogene. 2006; 25: 7336–7342.
19. Min H, Sung M, Son M, Kawasaki I, Shim YH. Transgenerational effects of proton beam irradiation on Caenorhabditis elegans germline apoptosis. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2017; 490(3): 608–615.
20. Parisot F, Bourdineaud JP, Plaire D, Adam-Guillermin C, Alonzo F. DNA alterations and effects on growth and reproduction in Daphnia magna during chronic exposure to gamma radiation over three successive generations. Aquatic Toxicology. 2015; 163: 27–36.
21. Sarapultseva EI, Dubrova YE. The long-term effects of acute exposure to ionising radiation on survival and fertility in Daphnia magna. Environmental Research. 2016; 150: 138–143.
22. Smith RW, Seymour CB, Moccia RD, Mothersill CE. Irradiation of rainbow trout at early life stages results in trans-generational effects including the induction of a bystander effect in non-irradiated fish. Environmental Research. 2016; 145: 26–38.
23. Shimada Atsuko, Shima Akihiro. Transgenerational genomic instability as revealed by a somatic mutation assay using the medaka fish. Mutation Research. 2004; 552: 119–124.
24. Tsyusko O, Glenn T, Yi Y, Joice G, Jones K, Aizawa K, Coughlin D, Zimbrick J, Hinton T. Differential genetic responses to ionizing irradiation in individual families of Japanese medaka. Mutation Research. 2011; 718: 18–23.
25. Hurem S, Gomes T, Brede DA, Lindbo Hansen E, Mutoloki S, Fernandez C, Mothersill C, Salbu B, Kassaye YA, Olsen AK, Oughton D, Aleström P, Lyche JL. Parental gamma irradiation induces reprotoxic effects accompanied by genomic instability in zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos. Environmental Research. 2017; 159: 564–578.
26. Hurem S, Martín LM, Lindeman L, Brede DA, Salbu B, Lyche JL, Aleström P, Kamstra JH. Parental exposure to gamma radiation causes progressively altered transcriptomes linked to adverse effects in zebrafish offspring. Environmental Pollution. 2018; 234: 855–863.
27. Gardner MJ, Snee MP, Hall AJ, Powell CA, Downes S, Terrell JD. Results of case-control study of leukaemia and lymphoma among young people near Sellafield nuclear plant in West Cumbria. BMJ. 1990; 300: 423–429.
28. Dubrova YE, Bersimbaev RI, Djansugurova LB, Tankimanova MK, Mamyrbaeva ZZh, Mustonen R, Lindholm C, Hultén M, Salomaa S. Nuclear weapons tests and human germline mutation rate. Science. 2002; 295: 1037.
29. Livshits LA, Malyarchuk SG, Kravchenko SA, Lukyanova EM, Antipkin YG, Arabskaya LP, Matsuka GH, Petit E, Giraudeau F, Gourmelon P, Vergnaud G, Le Guen B. Children of Chernobyl cleanup workers do not show elevated rates of mutations in minisatellite alleles. Radiation Research. 2001; 155: 74–80.
30. Furitsu K, Ryo H, Yeliseeva KG, Thuy le TT, Kawabata H, Krupnova EV, Trusova VD, Rzheutsky VA, Nakajima H, Kartel N, Nomura T. Microsatellite mutations show no increases in the children of the Chernobyl liquidators. Mutation Research. 2005; 581: 69–82.
31. Kiuru A, Auvinen A, Luokkamaki M, Makkonen K, Veidebaum T, Tekkel M, Rahu M, Hakulinen T, Servomaa K, Rytömaa T, Mustonen R. Hereditary minisatellite mutations among the offspring of Estonian Chernobyl cleanup workers. Radiation Research. 2003; 159: 651–655.
32. Kodaira M, Izumi S. Takahashi N, Nakamura N. No evidence of radiation effect on mutation rates at hypervariable minisatellite loci in the germ cells of atomic bomb survivors. Radiation Research. 2004; 162: 350–356.
33. Bezlepkin VG, Kirillova EN, Zakharova ML, Pavlova OS, Lomaeva MG, Fomenko LA, Antipova VN, Gaziev AI. Delayed and Transgenerational Molecular and Genetic Effects of Prolonged Influence of Ionizing Radiation in Nuclear Plant Workers. Radiation biology. Radioecology. 2011; 51(1); 20–32.
34. Rees GS, Trikik MZ, Winther JF, Tawn EJ, Stovall M, Olsen JH, Rechnitzer C, Schrøder H, Guldberg P, Boice JD Jr. A pilot study examining germline minisatellite mutations in the offspring of Danish childhood and adolescent cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Biol. 2006; 82(3): 153–160.
35. Vignard J, Mirey G, Salles B. Ionizing-radiation induced DNA double-strand breaks: A direct and indirect lighting up. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2013; 108: 362–369.
36. Tawn EJ, Whitehouse CA, Winther JF, Curwen GB, Rees GS, Stovall M, Olsen JH, Guldberg P, Rechnitzer C, Schrøder H, Boice JD Jr. Chromosome analysis in childhood cancer survivors and their offspring – no evidence for radiotherapy-induced persistent genomic instability. Mutation Research. 2005; 583: 198–206.
37. Signorello LB, Mulvihill JJ, Green DM, Munro HM, Stovall M, Weathers RE, Mertens AC, Whitton JA, Robison LL, Boice JD Jr. Stillbirth and neonatal death in relation to radiation exposure before conception: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2010; 376: 624–630.
38. Kuzmina NS, Lapteva NSh, Rubanovich AV. Hypermethylation of gene promoters in peripheral blood leukocytes in humans longterm after radiation exposure. Environmental Research. 2016; 146: 10–17.
39. Suzuki R, Ojima M, Kodama S, Watanabe M. Delayed activation of DNA damage checkpoint and radiation-induced genomic instability. Mutat Res. 2006; 597 (1–2): 73–77.
40. Venkatesan S, Natarajan AT, Hande M. Chromosomal instability—mechanisms and consequences. Mutation Research. 2015; 793: 176–184.
41. Sabatier L, Ricoul M, Pottier G, Murnane JP. The loss of single telomere can result in instability of multiple chromosomes in a human tumor cell line. Mol Cancer Res. 2005; 3: 139–150.
42. Blake GET, Watson ED. Unravelling the complex mechanisms of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance. Current Opinion in Chemical Biology. 2016; 33: 101–107.
43. Molla-Herman A, Matias NR, Huynh JR. Chromatin modifications regulate germ cell development and transgenerational information relay. Current Opinion in Insect Science. 2014; 1: 10–18.
44. Pogribny I, Koturbash I, Tryndyak V, Hudson D, Stevenson SML, Sedelnikova O, Bonner W, Kovalchuk O. Fractionated low-dose radiation exposure leads to accumulation of DNA damage and profound alterations in DNA and histone methylation in the murine thymus. Mol Cancer Res. 2005; 3(10): 553–561.
45. Kovalchuk O, Burke P, Besplug J, Slovack M, Filkowski J, Pogribny I. Methylation changes in muscle and liver tissues of male and female mice exposed to acute and chronic low-dose X-ray-irradiation. Mutation Research. 2004; 548: 75–84.
46. Koturbash I, Boyko A, Rodriguez-Juarez R, McDonald RJ, Tryndyak VP, Kovalchuk I, Pogribny IP, Kovalchuk O. Role of epigenetic effectors in maintenance of the long-term persistent bystander effect in spleen in vivo. Carcinogenesis. 2007; 28(8): 1831–1838.
47. Transgenerational Epigenetics / ed. Tollefsbol T. Academic Press, 2014. 412 pp. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-405944-3.00011-8.
48. Niwa O. Indirect mechanisms of radiation induced genomic instability at repeat loci // International Congress Series. 2007; 1299: 135–145.
49. Scully R, Xie A. Double strand break repair functions of histone H2AX. Mutation Research. Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis. 2013; 750 (1–2):5–14.
50. Vasilyev S, Velichevskaya AI, Vishnevskaya TV, Belenko AA, Gribova O, Plaksin MB, Startseva ZhA, Lebedev I. Background Level of γH2AX Foci in Human Cells as a Factor of Individual Radiosensitivity. Radiation biology. Radioecology. 2015; 55(4): 402–410.
51. Merrifield M, Kovalchuk O. Sins of Fathers Through a Scientific Lens: Transgenerational Effects Genome Stability. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803309-8.00034-3
52. Ahmad P, Sana J, Slavik M, Slampa P, Smilek P, Slaby O. MicroRNAs Involvement in Radioresistance of Head and Neck Cancer. Disease Markers. 2017. Article ID 8245345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8245345
53. Ilnytskyy Y, Zemp FJ, Koturbash I, Kovalchuk O. Altered microRNA expression patterns in irradiated hematopoietic tissues suggest a sex-specific protective mechanism. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2008; 377: 41–45.
54. Barber RC, Dubrova YE, Gant TW. Radiation-induced transgenerational alterations in MicroRNA expression. Toxicology. 2011; 290: 1–46.
55. Filkowski JN, Ilnytskyy Y, Tamminga J, Koturbash I, Golubov A, Bagnyukova T, Pogribny IP, Kovalchuk O. Hypomethylation and genome instability in the germline of exposed parents and their progeny is associated with altered miRNA expression. Carcinogenesis. 2010; 6: 1110–1115.
56. Aravin AA, Sachidanandam R, Bourc’his D, Schaefer C, Pezic D, Fejes Toth K, Bestor T, Hannon GJ. A piRNA pathway primed by individual transposons is linked to de novo DNA methylation in mice. Mol Cell. 2008; 31(6): 785–799.
57. Thomson T, Lin H. The biogenesis and function of PIWI proteins and piRNAs: progress and prospect. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2009; 25: 355–376.
58. Rechavi O, Houri-Ze’evi L, Anava S, Goh WSS, Kerk SY, Hannon GJ, Hobert O. Starvation-Induced Transgenerational Inheritance of Small RNAs in C. elegans. Cell. 2014; 158: 277–287.
59. Nelson VR Nadeau JH. Transgenerational genetic effects. Epigenomics. 2010; 2(6):797–806.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 15.03.2022. Accepted for publication: 11.05.2022
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 4
Risk Factors for Arterial Hypertension (Literature Review)
K.V. Briks
Southern Urals Biophysics Institute, Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk region, Russia
Contact person: K.V. Briks, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract
The review provides up-to-date data on effects of non-modifiable (sex, age) and modifiable (smoking, alcohol consumption, obesity, vitamin D deficiency, marital status, physical activity, depression) non-radiation risk factors on incidence risks of arterial hypertension. The review also refers to scientific evidence of the impact of ionizing radiation on arterial hypertension.
Keywords: arterial hypertension, ionizing radiation, risk factors, relative risk, odds ratio, excess relative risk
For citation: Briks KV. Risk Factors for Arterial Hypertension (Literature Review). Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(4):24-35. DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2022-67-4-24-35
References
1. Chazova I.Ye., Zhernakova Yu.V. Diagnosis and Treatment of Arterial Hypertension. Guidelines. Sistemnyye gipertenzii = Systemic hypertension. 2019;16;1:6–31. doi: 10.26442/2075082X.2019.1.190179 (In Russ.).
2. NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Worldwide Trends in Blood Pressure from 1975 to 2015: a Pooled Analysis of 1479 Population-Based Measurement Studies with 19,1 Million Participants. The Lancet. 2017;389;10064:37–55. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31919-5.
3. Forouzanfar M.H., Liu P., Roth G.A., Ng M., Biryukov S., Marczak L., et al. Global Burden of Hypertension and Systolic Blood Pressure of at Least 110 to 115 mm Hg, 1990–2015. Jama. 2017;317;2:165–182. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.19043.
4. Chow C.K., Teo K.K., Rangarajan S., Islam S., Gupta R., Avezum A., et al. Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension in Rural and Urban Communities in High-, Middle-, and Low-Income Countries. Jama. 2013;310;9:959–968. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.184182.
5. Kearney P.M., Whelton M., Reynolds K., Whelton P.K., He J. Worldwide Prevalence of Hypertension: a Systematic Review. J. Hypertens. 2004;22;1:11–19.
6. Ettehad D., Emdin C.A., Kiran A., Anderson S.G., Callender T., Emberson J., et al. Blood Pressure Lowering for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Death: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Lancet. 2016;87;10022:957–967. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01225-8.
7. Lip G.Y.H., Coca A., Kahan T., Boriani G., Manolis A.S., Olsen M.H., et al. Hypertension and Cardiac Arrhythmias: Executive Summary of a Consensus Document from the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and ESC Council on Hypertension, Endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE). European Heart Journal–Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy. 2017;3;4:235–250. doi: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvx019.
8. Gottesman R.F., Albert M.S., Alonso A., Coker L.H., Coresh J., Davis S.M., et al. Associations Between Midlife Vascular Risk Factors and 25-Year Incident Dementia in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Cohort. JAMA Neurology. 2017;74;10:1246–1254. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.1658.
9. Vishram J.K., Borglykke A., Andreasen A.H., Jeppesen J., Ibsen H., Jørgensen T., et al. Impact of Age on the Importance of Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressures for Stroke Risk: the MOnica, Risk, Genetics, Archiving, and Monograph (MORGAM) Project. Hypertension. 2012;60;5:1117–1123. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.201400.
10. Almagro P., Cabrera F.J., Diez J. Comorbidities and Shortterm Prognosis in Patients Hospitalized for Acute Exacerbation of COPD. The ESMI Study. Chest. 2012;142;5:1126–1133. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2413.
11. Park H.J., Leem A.Y., Lee S.H., Song J.H., Park M.S., Kim Y.S., et al. Comorbidities in Obstructive Lung Disease in Korea: Data from the Fourth and Fith Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Int. J. Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:1571–1582. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2413.
12. Hillas G., Perlikos F., Tsiligianni I., Tzanakis N. Managing Comorbidities in COPD. Int. J. Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:95–109. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S54473.
13. Rabahi M.F., Pereira S.A., Silva Júnior J.L., de Rezende A.P., Castro da Costa A., de Sousa Corrêa K., et al. Prevalence of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease among Patients with Systemic Arterial Hypertension Without Respiratory Symptoms. Int. J. Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:1525–1529. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S85588.
14. Portegies M.L., Lahousse L., Joos G.F., Hofman A., Koudstaal P.J., Stricker B.H., et al. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and the Risk of Stroke: the Rotterdam Study. Am. J. Respir Crit. Care Med. 2016;193;3:251–258. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201505–0962OC.
15. Gasparini A., Evans M., Coresh J., Grams M.E., Norin O., Qureshi A.R., et al. Prevalence and Recognition of Chronic Kidney Disease in Stockholm Healthcare. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2016;31;12:2086-2094. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfw354.
16. Hong J.W., Noh J.H., Kim D.J. Factors Associated with High Sodium Intake Based on Estimated 24-Hour Urinary Sodium Excretion: the 2009–2011 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95;9:2864. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002864.
17. Acuña L., Sánchez P., Soler L.A., Alvis L.F. Kidney Disease in Colombia: Priority for Risk Management. Rev. Panam. Salud Publica. 2016;40;1:16–22. PMID: 27706391.
18. Novikova D.S., Popkova T.V., Nasonov Ye.L. Arterial Hypertension in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Nauchno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologiya = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2011;3:52–68 (In Russ.).
19. Folomeyeva O.M., Nasonov Ye.L., Andrianova I.A., Galushko Ye.A., Goryachev D.V., Dubinina T.V., et al. Rheumatoid Arthritis in Rheumatological Care of Russia: The Severity of the Disease in a Russian Patient Population: a Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study (Raiser). Nauchno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologiya = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2010;1:50–60 (In Russ.).
20. Nikitina N.M., Rebrov A.P. Determining the Risk of Developing Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. Terapevticheskiy Arkhiv = Therapeutic Archive. 2009;82;6:29–33 (In Russ.).
21. Nasonov Ye.L., Popkova T.V. Cardiovascular Problems of Rheumatology. Nauchno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologiya = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2004;4:4–9 (In Russ.).
22. Gonzalez A., Maradit Kremers H., Crowson C.S., Ballman K.V., Roger V.L., Jacobsen S.J., et al. Do Cardiovascular Risk Factors Confer the Same Risk for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients as in Non-Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients? Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2008;67;1:64–69. doi: 10.1136/ard.2006.059980.
23. Chung C.P., Oeser A., Solus J.F., Avalos I., Gebretsadik T., Shintani A., et al. Prevalence of the Metabolic Syndrome is Increased in Rheumatoid Arthritis and is Associated with Coronary Atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis. 2008;196;2:756–763. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2007.01.004.
24. Panoulas V.F., Douglas K.M., Milionis H.J., Nightingale P., Kita M.D., Klocke R., et al. Serum Uric Acid is Independently Associated with Hypertension in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. J. Hum. Hypertens. 2008;22;3:177–182. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1002298.
25. Del Rincón I., Freeman G.L., Haas R.W., O'Leary D.H., Escalante A. Relative Contribution of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Manifestations to Atherosclerosis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52;11:3413–3423. doi: 10.1002/art.21397.
26. Dessein P.H., Joffe B.I., Stanwix A.E., Christian B.F., Veller M. Glucocorticoids and Insulin Sensitivity in Rheumatoid Arthritis. J. Rheumatol. 2004;31;5:867–874. PMID: 15124244.
27. Zhao Q., Hong D., Zhang Y., Sang Y., Yang Z., Zhang X. Association between Anti-TNF Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis and Hypertension: a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Medicine. 2015;94;14:e731. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000731.
28. Avina-Zubieta J.A., Thomas J., Sadatsafavi M., Lehman A.J., Lacaille D. Risk of Incident Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: a Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Ann. Rheum Dis. 2012;71;9:1524–1529. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200726.
29. Choi H.K., Soriano L.C., Zhang Y., Rodríguez L.A. Antihypertensive Drugs and Risk of Incident Gout among Patients with Hypertension: Population Based Case-Control Study. BMJ. 2012;344:d8190. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d8190.
30. McAdams DeMarco M.A., Maynard J.W., Baer A.N., Gelber A.C., Young J.H., Alonso A., Coresh J. Diuretic Sue, Increased Serum Urate Levels, and Risk of Incident Gout in a Population‐Based Study of Adults with Hypertension: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Cohort Study. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 2012;64;1:121–129. doi: 10.1002/art.33315.
31. Abeles A.M. Hyperuricemia, Gout, and Cardiovascular Disease: an Update. Current Rheumatology Reports. 2015;17;3:13. doi: 10.1007/s11926-015-0495-2.
32. McAdams-DeMarco M.A., Maynard J.W., Baer A.N., Coresh J. Hypertension and the Risk of Incident Gout in a Population‐Based Study: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Cohort. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension. 2012;14;10:675–679. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00674.x.
33. Xu W., Huang Y., Li L., Sun Z., Shen Y., Xing J., et al. Hyperuricemia Induces Hypertension Through Activation of Renal Epithelial Sodium Channel (ENaC). Metabolism. 2016;65;3:73–83. doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2015.10.026.
34. Vaidya V., Gangan N., Sheehan J. Impact of Cardiovascular Complications among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research. 2015;15;3:487–497. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2015.102466.
35. De Boer I.H., Bangalore S., Benetos A., Davis A.M., Michos E.D., Muntner P., et al. Diabetes and Hypertension: a Position Statement by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2017;40;9:1273–1284. doi: 10.2337/dci17-0026.
36. Petrie J.R., Guzik T.J., Touyz R.M. Diabetes, Hypertension, and Cardiovascular Disease: Clinical Insights and Vascular Mechanisms. Canadian Journal of Cardiology. 2018;34;5:575–584. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2017.12.005.
37. Ntaios G., Vemmos K., Lip G.Y., Koroboki E., Manios E., Vemmou A., et al. Risk Stratification for Recurrence and Mortality in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source. Stroke. 2016;47;9:2278–2285. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.013713.
38. Derakhshan A., Bagherzadeh-Khiabani F., Arshi B., Ramezankhani A., Azizi F., Hadaegh F. Different Combinations of Glucose Tolerance and Blood Pressure Status and Incident Diabetes, Hypertension, and Chronic Kidney Disease. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2016;5;8:e003917. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003917.
39. Sarwar N., Gao P., Seshasai S.R. Diabetes Mellitus, Fasting Blood Glucose Concentration, and Risk of Vascular Disease: a Collaborative Meta-Analysis of 102 Prospective Studies. Lancet. 2010;375;9733:2215–2222. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60484-9.
40. Oshchepkova Ye.V., Lazareva N.V., Chazova I.Ye. Quality Assessment of Examination of Patients with Arterial Hypertension in Primary Health Care (According to the Russian Arterial Hypertension Register Data). Sistemnyye Gipertenzii = Systemic Hypertension. 2017;14;2:29–34. (In Russ.). doi: 10.26442/2075-082X_14.2.29-34.
41. Vera G., Nataša D., Svetlana K., Sonja S., Jasmina G., Sonja T. Epidemiology of Hypertension in Serbia: Results of a National Survey. Journal of Epidemiology. 2012;22;3:261–266. doi: 10.2188/jea.JE20110077.
42. Cutler J.A., Sorlie P.D., Wolz M., Thom T., Fields L.E., Roccella E.J. Trends in Hypertension Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control Rates in United States Adults between 1988–1994 and 1999–2004. J. Hypertension. 2008;52;5:818–827. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.108.113357.
43. Cheng S., Xanthakis V., Sullivan L.M., Vasan R.S. Blood Pressure Tracking over the Adult Life Course:Patterns and Correlates in the Framingham Study. Hypertension. 2012;60;6:1393–1399. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.201780.
44. Wright J.D., Hughes J.P., Ostchega Y., Yoon S.S., Nwankwo T. Mean Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure in Adults Aged 18 and over in the United States, 2001–2008. National Center Health Statistics Reports. 2011;35:24. PMID: 21485611.
45. Yoon S.S., Fryar C.D., Carroll M.D. Hypertension Prevalence and Control among Adults: United States, 2011-2014. NCHS Data Brief. 2015;220:1–8. PMID: 26633197.
46. Chow C.K., Teo K.K., Rangarajan S., Islam S., Gupta R., Avezum A., et al. Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension in Rural and Urban Communities in High-, Middle-, and Low-Income Countries. Jama. 2013;310;9:959–968. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.184182.
47. Writing Group Members, Mozaffarian D., Benjamin E.J., Go A.S., Arnett D.K., Blaha M.J., Cushman M., et al. Executive Summary: Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics – 2016 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133;4:447. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000366.
48. Vishnevskiy A., Andreyev Ye., Timonin S. Mortality from Cardiovascular Diseases and Life Expectancy in Russia. Demograficheskoye Obozreniye = Demographic Review. 2016;3;1:6–34 (In Russ.).
49. Vasan R.S., Beiser A., Seshadri S., Larson M.G., Kannel W.B., D'Agostino R.B., Levy D. Residual Life Time Risk for Developing Hypeгtension in Middleaged Women and Men: The Frarningham Неагt Study. JАМА. 2002;287;8:1003–1010. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.8.1003.
50. Boytsov S.A., Balanova Yu.A., Shalnova S.A., Deyev A.D., Artamonova G.V., Gatagonova T.M., et al. Arterial Hypertension among Individuals of 25-64 Years Old: Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment and Control. By the Data from ECCD. Kardiovaskulyarnaya Terapiya i Profilaktika = Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention 2014;14;4:4–14 (In Russ.).
51. Ibragimova Kh.I., Mammayev S.N., Omarova D.A. Gender-Specific Regulation of Blood Pressure and Antihypertensive Treatment. Arterialnaya Gipertenziya = Arterial Hypertension. 2018;24;3:303–308 (In Russ.). doi: 10.18705/1607-419X-2018-24-3- 303-308
52. Danaei G., Finucane M.M., Lin J.K. National, Regional, and Global Trends in Systolic Blood Pressure Since 1980: Systematic Analysis of Health Examination Surveys and Epidemiological Studies with 786 Country-Years and 5,4 Million Participants. Lancet. 2011;377;9765:568–577. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62036-3.
53. Thacker E.L., Gillett S.R., Wadley V.G., Unverzagt F.W., Judd S.E., McClure L.A., et al. The American Heart Association Life’s Simple 7 and Incident Cognitive Impairment: the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study. J. Am. Heart. Assoc. 2014;3;3:e000635. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.113.000635.
54. Crim M.T., Yoon S.S., Ortiz E., Wall H.K., Schober S., Gillespie C., et al. National Surveillance Definitions for Hypertension Prevalence and Control among Adults. Circ. Cardiovasc Qual. Outcomes. 2012;5;3:343–351. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.111.963439.
55. Nwankwo T., Yoon S.S., Burt V., Gu Q. Hypertension among Adults in the United States: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2011–2012. NCHS Data Brief. 2013;133:1–8. PMID: 24171916.
56. Linneberg A., Jacobsen R.K., Skaaby T., Taylor A.E., Fluharty M.E., Jeppesen J.L., et al. Effect of Smoking on Blood Pressure and Resting Heart Rate: a Mendelian Randomization Meta-Analysis in the CARTA Consortium. Circulation: Cardiovascular Genetics. 2015;8;6:832–841. doi: 10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.115.001225.
57. Liu X., Byrd J.B. Cigarette Smoking and Subtypes of Uncontrolled Blood Pressure among Diagnosed Hypertensive Patients: Paradoxical Associations and Implications. American Journal of Hypertension. 2017;30;6:602–609. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpx014.
58. Seven E., Husemoen L.L., Wachtell K., Ibsen H., Linneberg A., Jeppesen J.L. Five-Year Weight Changes Associate with Blood Pressure Alterations Independent of Changes in Serum Insulin. Journal of Hypertension. 2014;32;11:2231–2237. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000317.
59. Shtarik S.Yu. Connection between Alcohol Consumption and Arterial Hypertension. Byulleten Sibirskogo Otdeleniya Rossiyskoy Akademii Meditsinskikh Nauk. 2010;30;5:25–29 (In Russ.).
60. Balabina N.M., Baglushkina S.Yu. The Use of Alcohol and Arterial Pressure. Sibirskiy Meditsinskiy Zhurnal = The Siberian Medical Journal. 2012;110;3:20–22 (In Russ.).
61. Fan A.Z., Russell M., Stranges S., Dorn J., Trevisan M. Association of Lifetime Alcohol Drinking Trajectories with Cardiometabolic Risk. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2008;93;1:154–161. doi: 10.1210/jc.2007-1395.
62. Druzhilov M.A., Druzhilova O.Yu., Beteleva Yu.Ye., Kuznetsova T.Yu. Obesity as Cardiovascular Risk Factor: Accent on Quality and Functional Activity of Adipose Tissue. Rossiyskiy Kardiologicheskiy Zhurnal = Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2015;20;4:111–117 (In Russ.). doi: 10.15829/1560-4071-2015-04-111-117.
63. Xin X., He J., Frontini M.G., Ogden L.G., Motsamai O.I., Whelton P.K. Effects of Alhohol Reduction on BP: a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Hypertension. 2001;38:1112–1117. doi: 10.1161/hy1101.093424.
64. Shalnova S.A., Konradi A.O., Balanova Yu.A., Deyev A.D., Imayeva A.E., Muromtseva G.A., et al. What Factors Do Influence Arterial Hypertension Control in Russia. Kardiovaskulyarnaya Terapiya i Profilaktika = Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2018;17;4:53–60 (In Russ.). doi: 10.15829/1728-8800-2018-4-53-60.
65. Drapkina O.M., Chaparkina S.O. Interrelation of Metabolic Syndrome, Aseptic Inflammation and Endothelial Dysfunction. Rossiyskiye Meditsinskiye Vesti. 2007;12;3:67–76 (In Russ).
66. Lee Y. Indices of Abdominal Obesity Are Better Discriminators of Cardiovascular Risk Factors Than BMi: a Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2008;61:646–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.08.012.
67. Kumar S., Sharma V. Hypertension, Obesity, Diabetes, and Heart Failure-Free Survival: the Cardiovascular Disease Lifetime Risk Pooling Project in New Delhi, India. Atherosclerosis. 2017;263:e159. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2017.06.504.
68. Hall J.E., do Carmo J.M., da Silva A.A., Wang Z., Hall M.E. Obesity-Induced Hypertension: Interaction of Neurohumoral and Renal Mechanisms. Circulation research. 2015;116;6:991–1006. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.305697.
69. Shalnova S.A., Deyev A.D., Balanova Yu.A., Kapustina A.V., Imayeva A.E., Muromtseva G.A., et al. Twenty Years Trends of Obesity and Arterial Hypertension and Their Association in Russia. Kardiovaskulyarnaya Terapiya i Profilaktika = Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2017;16;4:4–10. (In Russ.). doi: 10.15829/1728-8800-2017-4-4-10.
70. Tian S., Dong G.H., Wang D., Liu M.M., Lin Q., Meng X.J., et al. Factors Associated with Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment and Control of Hypertension in Urban Adults from 33 Communities in China: the CHPSNE Study. Hypertension Research. 2011;34;10:1087. doi:10.1038/hr.2011.99.
71. Sakboonyarat B., Mungthin M. Prevalence and Associated Factors of Uncontrolled Hypertension among Thai Patients with Hypertension: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey. Rev. Epidemiol. Sante Publique. Elsevier Masson. 2018;66:S310–S311. doi: 10.1016/J.RESPE.2018.05.194.
72. Hippisley-Cox J., Coupland C., Pringle M., Crown N., Hammersley V. Married Couples’ Risk of Same Disease: Cross Sectional Study. BMJ. 2002;325;7365:636–640. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7365.636.
73. Di Castelnuovo A., Quacquaruccio G., Donati M.B., de Gaetano G., Iacoviello L. Spousal Concordance for Major Coronary Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2009;169;1:1–8. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwn234.
74. Qi D., Nie X.L., Wu S., Cai J. Vitamin D and Hypertension: Prospective Study and Meta-Analysis. PloS One. 2017;12;3:e0174298. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174298.
75. Forman J.P., Giovannucci E., Holmes M.D., Bischoff-Ferrari H.A., Tworoger S.S., Willett W.C., et al. Plasma 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Levels and Risk of Incident Hypertension. Hypertension. 2007;49;5:1063–1069. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.087288.
76. Forman J.P., Curhan G.C., Taylor E.N. Plasma 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Levels and Risk of Incident Hypertension among Young Women. Hypertension. 2008;52;5:828–832. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.108.117630.
77. Porrecca E., Di Febbo C., Fusco L., Moretta V., Di Nisio M., Cuccurullo F. Solube Thrombomodulin and Vascular Adhesion Molecule-1 Are Associated to Leptin Plasma Levels in Obese Women. Atherosclerosis. 2004;172;1:175–180. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2003.09.022.
78. Forouhi N.G., Luan J., Cooper A., Boucer B.J., Wareham N.J. Baseline Serum 25-Hydroxy Vitamin D is Predictive of Future Glycemic Status and Insulin Resistance: the Medical Research Council Ely Prospective Study 1990–2000. Diabetes. 2008;57;10:2619–2625. doi: 10.2337/db08–0593.
79. Meng L., Chen D., Yang Y., Zheng Y., Hui R. Depression Increases the Risk of Hypertension Incidence: a Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies. J. Hypertens. 2012;30;5:239–243. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e32835080b7.
80. Gafarov V.V., Panov D.O., Gromova Ye.A., Gagulin I.V., Gafarova A.V. Influence of Depression on Risk of Arterial Hypertension in Female 25-64 Years in Open Population. Mir Nauki, Kultury, Obrazovaniya = The World of Science, Culture and Education. 2012;4;35:277–278 (In Russ.).
81. Li Z., Li Y., Chen L., Chen P., Hu Y. Prevalence of Depression in Patients with Hypertension: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Medicine. 2015;94;31:e1317. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001317.
82. Chobanov R.E., Babayeva A.D., Islamzade I.F. Assessment of the Impact of Correcting of Low Physical Activity on the Effectiveness of Treatment of Hypertension among Women of Reproductive Age in Outpatient Conditions. Vísnik Problem Biologii i Meditsiny = Bulletin of Problems in Biology and Medicine. 2016;1;4:100–104 (In Russ.).
83. Hegde S.M., Solomon S.D. Influence of Physical Activity on Hypertension and Cardiac Structure and Function. Current Hypertension Reports. 2015;17;10:77. doi: 10.1007/s11906-015-0588-3.
84. Diaz K.M., Booth J.N., Seals S.R., Abdalla M., Dubbert P.M., Sims M., et al. Physical Activity and Incident Hypertension in African Americans: the Jackson Heart Study. Hypertension. 2017;69;3:421–427. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.116.08398.
85. Chen M., Hu J., McCoy T., Letvak S., Ivanov L. Predicting Changes in Physical Activity and Blood Pressure among Older Adults with Hypertension. Innovation in Aging. 2018;2;Suppl 1:499. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igy023.1857.
86. Börjesson M., Onerup A., Lundqvist S., Dahlöf B. Physical Activity and Exercise Lower Blood Pressure in Individuals with Hypertension: Narrative Review of 27 RCTs. Br. J. Sports Med. 2016;50;6:356–361. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-095786.
87. Larsen M.K., Matchkov V.V. Hypertension and Physical Exercise: the Role of Oxidative Stress. Medicina. 2016;52;1:19–27. doi: 10.1016/j.medici.2016.01.005.
88. Bakker E.A., Sui X., Brellenthin A.G., Lee D.C. Physical Activity and Fitness for the Prevention of Hypertension. Current Opinion in Cardiology. 2018;33;4:394–401. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000526.
89. Liu X., Zhang D., Liu Y., Sun X., Han C., Wang B., et al. Dose–Response Association between Physical Activity and Incident Hypertension: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies. Hypertension. 2017;69;5:813–820. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.116.08994.
90. Li W., Wang D., Wu C., Shi O., Zhou Y., Lu Z. The Effect of Body Mass Index and Physical Activity on Hypertension among Chinese Middle-Aged and Older Population. Scientific Reports. 2017;7;1:10256. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-11037-y.
91. Vorobyev Ye.I., Stepanov R.P. Ioniziruyushcheye Izlucheniye i Krovenosnyye Sosudy = Ionizing Radiation and Blood Vessels. Moscow, Energatomizdat Publ., 1985 (In Russ.).
92. Moskalev Yu.I. Otdalennyye Posledstviya Ioniziruyushchikh Izlucheniy = Long-Term Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Moscow, Meditsina Publ., 1991 (In Russ.).
93. Ilin L.A. Radiatsionnaya Meditsina = Radiation Medicine. Moscow, IzdAT Publ., 2001 (In Russ.).
94. Ilin LA., Kirillov VF, Korenkov IP. Radiatsionnaya Meditsina = Radiation Medicine. Moscow, IzdAT Publ., 1999 (In Russ.).
95. Ilin L.A. Tekhnogennoye Oblucheniye i Bezopasnost Cheloveka. Elektronnyy Resurs = Technogenic Radiation and Human Safety. Electronic Resource. Moscow Publ., 2002 (In Russ.).
96. Stavitskiy R.V., Guslistyy V.P., Beridze A.D. Determination of "Small" Doses of AI by Analytical Processing of Blood Parameters. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 1998;43;1:58–61 (In Russ.).
97. Stavitskiy R.V., Lebedev L.A., Mekheyechev A.V., Mikheyenko S.G., Zhanina T.V. Some Items of Low Radiation Dose Effects. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2003;48;1:30–39 (In Russ.).
98. Stavitskiy R.V., Lebedev L.A., Mekheyechev A.V., Zhanina T.V. Analysis of the Effects of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation. Meditsinskaya Tekhnika = Biomedical Engineering. 2002;2:37–43 (In Russ).
99. Ryabukhin Yu.S. Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation and Health: a Systematic Approach. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2000;45;4:5–42. (In Russ.).
100. Kabasheva N.Ya., Okladnikova N.D., Mamakova O.V. Causes of Lethal Outcomes and Morphologic Characteristics of Cardiovascular System in the Long-Term Period after a Chronic Exposure to Radiation. Kardiologiya = Kardiologiia. 2001;11:78. (In Russ.).
101. Tsuya A., Wakano Y., Otake M. Capillary Microscopic Observation Onthe Superficial Minute Vessels of Atomic-Bomb Survivors, 1956–57. 1. Fingernail Fold, Labial Mucosa, and Lingual Mucosa. ABCC TR 23–69. Hiroshima, Japan: Radiation Effects Research Foundation, 1969.
102. Stewart J.R., Cohn K.E., Fajardo L.F., Hancock W.E., Kaplan H.S. Radiation-Induced Heart Disease. A Study of Twenty-Five Patients. Radiology. 1967;89:302–310.
103. Van Cleave C.D. Late Somatic Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Oakridge: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of Technical Information, 1968.
104. Casarett G.W. Similarities and Contrasts between Radiation and Timepathology. Adv. Gerontol. Res. 1964;1:.109–163.
105. Reinhold H.S. Cell Viability of the Vessel Wall. Curr. Top. Radiat. Res.1974;10:9–28.
106. Little M.P., Zablotska L.B., Brenner A.V., Lipshultz S.E. Circulatory Disease Mortality in the Massachusetts Tuberculosis Fluoroscopy Cohort Study. European Journal of Epidemiology. 2015;31;3:287–309. doi: 10.1007/s10654-015-0075-9.
107. Zablotska L.B., Little M.P., Cornett R.J. Potential Increased Risk of Ischemic Heart Disease Mortality with Significant Dose Fractionation in the Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2013;179;1:120–131. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt244.
108. Shimizu Y., Kodama K., Nishi N., Kasagi F., Suyama A., Soda M., et al. Radiation Exposure and Circulatory Disease Risk: Hiroshima and Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Survivor Data, 1950 – 2003. BMJ. 2010;340:b5349. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b5349.
109. Takahashi I., Shimizu Y., Grant E.J., Cologne J., Ozasa K., Kodama K. Heart Disease Mortality in the Life Span Study, 1950–2008. Radiation Research. 2017;187;3:319–332. doi: 10.1667/rr14347.1.
110. Yamada M., Lennie Wong F., Fujiwara S., Akahoshi M., Suzuki G. Noncancer Disease Incidence in Atomic Bomb Survivors, 1958–1998. Radiation Research. 2004;161;6:622–632. doi: 10.1667/rr3183.
111. Ivanov V.K., Maksioutov M.A., Chekin S.Y., Petrov A.V., Biryukov A.P., Kruglova Z.G., Kravchenko J.S. The Risk of Radiation-Induced Cerebrovascular Disease in Chernobyl Emergency Workers. Health Physics. 2006;90;3:199–207. doi: 10.1097/01.hp.0000175835.31663.ea.
112. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Maksyutov M.A., Kashcheyev V.V., Karpenko S.V., Tumanov K.A., et al. Radiation Risk of Incidence of Hypertensia among Russian Recovery Operation Workers of the Chernobyl Accident. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2017;62;1:32–37 (In Russ.). doi: 10.12737/25050.
113. Azizova T., Briks K., Bannikova M., Grigoryeva E. Hypertension Incidence Risk in a Cohort of Russian Workers Exposed to Radiation at the Mayak Production Association Over Prolonged Periods. Hypertension. 2019;73;6:1174–1184. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.11719.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The author declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors
Article received: 15.03.2022. Accepted for publication: 23.04.2022
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 4
Hygienic Aspects of Special Assessment of Working Conditions with Ionizing Radiation Sources
N.L. Proskuryakova, A.V. Simakov, Yu.V. Abramov
A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia.
Contact person: Proskuryakova Natalia Leonidovna, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Substantiation of hygienic approaches to assessing the working conditions of personnel when working with sources of ionizing radiation.
Material and methods: The article considers one of the most important components of the complex of measures to solve the problem of ensuring radiation safety – conducting a special assessment of the working conditions (SAWC) of workers exposed to radiation from ionizing radiation sources (IRS) in the course of production activities. The issues of assessing occupational risks for workers in working conditions when working with IRS at nuclear energy use facilities are touched upon.
Results: At present, the Procedure for conducting the SAWC is determined by Federal Law No. 426-FZ dated December 28, 2013 «On special assessment of working Conditions» and the Methodology for conducting a special assessment of working conditions (approved by the order of the Ministry of Labor of the Russian Federation dated November 14, 2016, No. 642n). The established procedure for carrying out the SAWC is based on the hygienic criteria for the classification of working conditions defined by the Guidelines P 2.2.2006-05 and P 2.6.5.07–2019. Working conditions when working with ionizing radiation sources, unlike the effects of other harmful production factors, are characterized by the presence of harmful production factors that do not exceed hygienic standards, and the degree of harmfulness of working conditions is determined not so much by the severity of threshold deterministic effects in workers when irradiating individual organs, but primarily by an increase in the risk of stochastic non-threshold effects.
Conclusion: When conducting the SAWC of workers exposed to radiation from ionizing radiation sources in the course of production activities, it is necessary to take into account the following distinctive characteristics of the effects of ionizing radiation:
– in contrast to the principles of classification of working conditions set out in P 2.2.755-99 and Federal Law No. 426-FZ, when working with IRS, harmful working conditions are characterized by the presence of production factors that do not exceed hygienic standards;
– when working with ionizing radiation sources, the degree of harmfulness of working conditions is determined not only by the severity of the manifestation of threshold deterministic effects in workers, but mainly by an increase in the risk of stochastic threshold-free effects;
– the correct conduct of the SAWC and assessment of working conditions according to the indicators of harmfulness and danger when working with IRS are a prerequisite for the quantitative assessment of the occupational risk of employees of the nuclear energy use facilities.
Keywords: working environment, special assessment, hygiene criteria, radiation safety, ionizing radition, occupational risks
For citation: Proskuryakova NL, Simakov AV, Abramov YuV. Hygienic Aspects of Special Assessment of Working Conditions with Ionizing Radiation Sources. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(4):19-23. DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2022-67-4-19-23
References
1. Manual R 2.2.2006-05. Guidelines for the hygienic assessment of factors of the working environment and the labor process. Criteria and classification of working conditions (In Russian).
2. Manual R 2.2/2.6.1.1195–03. Hygienic criteria for assessing working conditions and classification of workplaces when working with ionizing radiation sources (In Russian).
3. Manual R 2.6.5.07-2019. Hygienic criteria for special assessment and classification of working conditions when working with ionizing radiation sources (In Russian).
4. SanPiN 2.6.1.2523-09. Radiation Safety Standards (NRB-99/2009) M. 2009 (In Russian)).
5. Simakov A.V., Kochetkov O.A., Abramov Yu.V. Scientific substantiation of hygienic criteria of working environment assessment regarding ionizing radiation sources interaction / in Proceedings Int. Conf. “Current issues of radiation hygiene», 2004, St.-Petersburg, p. 36-38.
6. Simakov A.V., Abramov Yu.V. Assessment and classification of working environment regarding ionizing radiation sources interaction/ in Anniversary Proceedings « 50 years Head CSSES of Federal department «Medbioekstrem».,2004, M., p.164-169;
7. Simakov A.V., Abramov Yu.V. Certification of workplaces regarding ionizing radiation sources interaction. Proceedings Materials of the X Russian Congress of Hygienists and Sanitary Doctors. 2007. book II, p. 1253-1256.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 18.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 11.05.2022
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022. Vol. 67. № 4
Incidence and Mortality from Central Nervous System Tumors
in the Cohort of Workers Chronically Exposed to Radiation
M.B. Moseeva, T.V. Azizova, M.V. Bannikova
Southern Urals Biophysics Institute of the Federal Medical Biological Agency, Ozyorsk, Russia.
Contact person: Azizova Tamara Vasilievna, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract
Purpose: To analyze incidence and mortality rates of central nervous system (CNS) primary tumors (PT) in the cohort of workers chronically exposed to radiation.
Material and methods: Study cohort included 22237 Mayak Production Association workers. Work history data and dose estimates from the “Mayak Worker Dosimetry System 2013” were used. Clinical and epidemiology data were obtained from the “Clinic” database. Crude and age-adjusted (by indirect method) incidence and mortality rates for CNS PT per 100000 person-years were calculated. Standardized incidence and mortality trends were analyzed by Jointpoint 4.0.4.
Results: 53 cases and 47 deaths from malignant neoplasms (MN) of brain and spinal cord, cerebral nerve and other parts of CNS (C70–C72 ICD-10 codes) as well as 40 cases and 7 deaths from non-malignant neoplasms (NMN) of brain and other parts of CNS (D-33 ICD-10 code) were identified. CNS MN were more frequent among males (83 %), and CNS NMN were more frequent among females (55 %). Both CNS MN and NMN developed at younger ages among males as compared with females, CNS PT frequency increased with increased attained age. Analysis in relation to calendar period revealed the increasing trend for CNS PT incidence among females only (р=0,008). Effects of chronic occupational radiation exposure on CNS PT incidence and mortality rates were not established either among males or females.
Conclusion: Findings should be considered as preliminary and require further studies.
Keywords: workers, chronic radiation exposure, central nervous system, primary tumors, malignant neoplasms, non-malignant neoplasms
For citation: Moseeva MB, Azizova TV, Bannikova MV. Incidence and Mortality from Central Nervous System Tumors in the Cohort of Workers Chronically Exposed to Radiation. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2022;67(4):42-48. DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2022-67-4-42-48
References
1. Pouchieu C, Gruber A, Berteaud E, Ménégon P, Monteil P, Huchet A, et al. Increasing incidence of central nervous system (CNS) tumors (2000–2012): findings from a population based registry in Gironde (France). BMC Cancer. 2018;18:653. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4545-9.
2. Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2019 году (заболеваемость и смертность). Под ред.: Каприна АД, Старинского ВВ, Шахзадовой АО. М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена − филиал ФГБУ «НМИЦ радиологии» Минздрава России, 2020. илл. 252 с. ISBN 978-5-85502-260-5 [Malignant tumors in Russia in 2019 (incidence and moratlity). Eds.: Kaprin AD, Starinskiy VV, Shakhzadovoy AO. M: P. Hertsen MORI – FSBI “NMRRC” of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 2020. Ill. 252 c. ISBN 978-5-85502-260-5]
3. Ostrom QT, Patil N, Cioffi G, Waite K, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS. CBTRUS Statistical Report: Primary Brain and Other Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2013–2017. Neuro-Oncology. 2020;22(S1):1–96. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noaa200.
4. Ohgaki H. Epidemiology of Brain Tumors. In: Methods of Molecular Biology, Cancer Epidemiology. Ed.: Verma M. Totowa, NJ, USA: Humana Press, a part of Springer Science + Business Media, 2009, vol. 472, P. 323-342. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-60327-492-0.
5. Khodamoradi F, Ghoncheh M, Pakzad R, Gandomani HS, Salehiniya H. The incidence and mortality of brain and central nervous system cancer and their relationship with human development index in the world. WCRJ. 2017;4(4):e985. DOI: 10.32113/wcrj_201712_985
6. Bondy ML, Scheurer ME, Malmer B, Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Davis FG, Il’yasova D, et al. Brain tumor epidemiology: consensus from the brain tumor epidemiology consortium. Cancer. 2008;113(7 suppl):1953–1968. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23741.
7. Schlehofer B, Hettinger I, Ryan P, Blettner M, Preston-Martin S, Little J, et al. Occupational risk factors for low grade and high grade glioma: results from an international case control study of adult brain tumours. Int. J. Cancer. 2005;113:116–125. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.20504.
8. Alexiou GA, Kallinteri A, Nita E, Zagorianakou P, Levidiotou S, Voulgaris S. Serum IgE levels in patients with intracranial tumors. Neuroimmunol Neuroinflammation. 2015;2(1):15–17. DOI: 10.4103/2347-8659.149398.
9. Wiedmann MKH, Brunborg C, Di Ieva A, Lindemann K, Johannesen TB, Vatten L, et al. Overweight, obesity and height as risk factors for meningioma, glioma, pituitary adenoma and nerve sheath tumor: a large population-based prospective cohort study. Acta Oncologica. 2017;56(10):1302–1309. DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1330554.
10. Ostrom QT, Fahmideh MA, Cote DJ, Muskens IS, Schraw JM, Scheurer ME, et al. Risk factors for childhood and adult primary brain tumors. Neuro-Oncology. 2019;21(11):1357–1375. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noz123.
11. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. Special issue. 2017;176(1–2).
12.Третьяков ФД. Характеристика радиационной обстановки на плутониевом производстве ПО «Маяк» в разные периоды его деятельности. В: Источники и эффекты облучения работников ПО «Маяк» и населения, проживающего в зоне влияния предприятия. Науч. ред.: Романов СА, Киселев МФ. Озерск: б. и., 2009; Ч. 1:4–50. [Tretyakov FD. Characteristics of the radiation environment at the Maya PA plutonium production plant during different periods of its activity. Eds.: Romanov SA, Kiselev MF. Ozyorsk: without p.h., 2009; P1:4–50.]
13. Третьяков Ф.Д., Романов С.А. Характеристика радиационной обстановки на первом радиохимическом заводе ПО «Маяк». В: Источники и эффекты облучения работников ПО «Маяк» и населения, проживающего в зоне влияния предприятия. Науч. ред.: Киселев МФ, Романов СА. Челябинск: Челябинский дом печати, 2010; Ч. 2:8–34. [Tretyakov FD, Romanov SA. Characteristics of the radiation environment at the first Maya PA radiochemical plant. Eds.: Romanov SA, Kiselev MF. Ozyorsk: without p.h., 2009; P1:4–50.]
14. Koshurnikova NA, Shilnikova NS, Okatenko PV. Characteristics of the cohort of workers at the Mayak nuclear complex. Radiat Res. 1999; 152(4):352–363. PMID: 10477912
15. Азизова ТВ, Тепляков ИИ, Григорьева ЕС, Власенко ЕВ, Сумина МВ, Дружинина МБ, и др. Медико-дозиметрическая база данных «Клиника» работников ПО «Маяк» и их семей. Мед. радиология и радиационная безопасность. 2009; 54(5): 26–35. [Azizova TV, Teplyakov II, Grigorieva EU, Vlasenko EV, Sumina MV, Druzhinina MB, et al. Medical dosimetric database «Clinic» of employees OF PA «Mayak» and their families. Medical Radiology аnd Radiation Safety. 2009;54(5):26-35. (In Russ.)]
16. Мерков АМ, Поляков ЛЕ. Санитарная статистика Пособие для врачей. М.: Атомиздат; 1975. 245 с.[Merkov AM, Polyakov LE. Sanitary statistics M.1975.245pp.(In Russ.)]
17. Joinpoint Trend Analysis Software. [https://surveillance.cancer.gov/joinpoint/ дата обращения 23.03.2022].
18. Международная классификация болезней 10-го пересмотра (МКБ-10) [https://mkb-10.com/ дата обращения 01.02.2021]
19. Ostrom QT, Patil N, Cioffi G, Waite K, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS. CBTRUS Statistical Report: Primary Brain and Other Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2014–2018. Neuro-Oncology. 2021; 23(S3):iii1–iii105. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noab200.
20. Qu S, Gao J, Tang B, Yu B, Shen YP, Tu Y. Low-dose ionizing radiation increases the mortality risk of solid cancers in nuclear industry workers: a meta-analysis. Molecular and clinical oncology. 2018; 8:703–711. DOI: 10.3892/mco.2018.1590
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 15.03.2022. Accepted for publication: 11.05.2022