Childhood cancer incidence in relation to distance from the former nuclear testing site in semiplatnsk, kazakhstan

1994

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1002/ijc.2910590407
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Rates of childhood cancer between 1981 and 1990 in the 4 administrative zones of Kazakhstan were studied to assess the relationship, if any, with distance from nuclear testing sites. Risk of various cancers among children aged 14 years or younger were estimated in relation to distance from (1) a site where testing in air was performed before 1963, (2) a site where underground testing took place thereafter, and (3) a reservoir, known as "Atom Lake," created by 4 nuclear explosions in 1965. Risk of acute leukaemia rose significantly with increasing proximity of residence to the testing areas, although the absolute value of the risk gradient was relatively small. The relative risk for those living less than 200 km from the air-testing site was 1.76 compared with those living 400 km or more away from the site. Similar relative risks were observed for the underground site and "Atom Lake." There was also some evidence of increased risk of brain tumours in association with proximity to the test sites. In 2 of the 4 zones studied, there was substantial regional variation in acute leukaemia rates which was not attributable to distance from the test site. The findings may be affected by potential confounders, notably urban/rural status and ethnic factors.