Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern?

BACKGROUND & AIMS Computed tomography colonography (CTC), particularly using noncathartic techniques, has the clear potential to increase compliance for colorectal cancer screening. Because the geometry for CTC is highly advantageous, it can be performed with lower radiation doses than almost any other CT examination. If CTC were to become a standard screening tool for the population age 50 years and older, the potential market in the United States would soon be over 100 million people. Therefore, it is pertinent to consider the radiation exposure and any potential radiation risk to the population from such a mass CTC screening program. METHODS Organ doses from CTC examinations can be estimated with standard techniques. These doses can be applied to organ- and dose-specific radiation cancer risk estimates to estimate the excess cancer risk resulting from the radiation from a paired (supine and prone) CTC examination. RESULTS The cancer risks associated with the radiation exposure from CTC are unlikely to be zero, but they are small. A best estimate for the absolute lifetime cancer risk associated with the radiation exposure using typical current scanner techniques is about 0.14% for paired CTC scans for a 50-year-old, and about half that for a 70-year-old. These values probably could be reduced by factors of 5 or 10 with optimized CTC protocols. CONCLUSIONS In terms of the radiation exposure, the benefit-risk ratio potentially is large for CTC.

[1]  C H McCollough,et al.  CT colonography: single- versus multi-detector row imaging. , 2001, Radiology.

[2]  E. Arias,et al.  United States life tables, 2002. , 2004, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[3]  J. Burdick,et al.  Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. , 2004, JAMA.

[4]  Yukiko Shimizu,et al.  Effect of Recent Changes in Atomic Bomb Survivor Dosimetry on Cancer Mortality Risk Estimates , 2004, Radiation research.

[5]  Karl Ludwig,et al.  CT colonography: Protocol optimization with multi-detector row CT--study in an anthropomorphic colon phantom. , 2003, Radiology.

[6]  D. Preston,et al.  Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part II: Solid tumors, 1958-1987. , 1994, Radiation research.

[7]  A. Zauber,et al.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. , 1993 .

[8]  B. Schueler,et al.  A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. , 2001, Medical physics.

[9]  E. V. Benton,et al.  Space radiation dosimetry in low-Earth orbit and beyond. , 2001, Nuclear instruments & methods in physics research. Section B, Beam interactions with materials and atoms.

[10]  M. Macari,et al.  Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. , 2002, Radiology.

[11]  J G Fletcher,et al.  Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. , 2000, Radiology.

[12]  R. Sievert,et al.  Book Reviews : Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (as amended 1959 and revised 1962). I.C.R.P. Publication 6. 70 pp. PERGAMON PRESS. Oxford, London and New York, 1964. £1 5s. 0d. [TB/54] , 1964 .

[13]  Axel Stäbler,et al.  Dose Reduction in Multislice Computed Tomography , 2005, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[14]  Michael F McNitt-Gray,et al.  AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. , 2002, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[15]  L. Anspaugh,et al.  CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT: RETROSPECTIVE AND PROSPECTIVE ESTIMATES OF EXTERNAL DOSE OF THE POPULATION OF UKRAINE , 2002, Health physics.

[16]  C A Kelsey,et al.  CT scanning: patterns of use and dose , 2000, Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection.

[17]  R. Ullrich,et al.  Radiation carcinogenesis: time-dose relationships. , 1987, Radiation research.

[18]  K J Lehmann,et al.  [Clinical use of software-controlled x-ray tube modulation with "Smart-Scan" in spiral CT]. , 1997, Aktuelle Radiologie.

[19]  R. Doll,et al.  Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  J G Fletcher,et al.  CT colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study. , 2001, Radiology.

[21]  C. Klabunde,et al.  Use of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening , 2005, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[22]  Jonathan B. Kruskal,et al.  CT colonography: colonic distention improved by dual positioning but not intravenous glucagon , 2002, European Radiology.

[23]  C J Martin,et al.  Balancing patient dose and image quality. , 1999, Applied radiation and isotopes : including data, instrumentation and methods for use in agriculture, industry and medicine.

[24]  P. Pickhardt,et al.  Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  K S Pentlow,et al.  Radiation dose in CT. , 1992, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[26]  Corinne A Tipker,et al.  CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. , 2002, Radiology.

[27]  R. J. Barish.  In-flight radiation exposure during pregnancy. , 2004, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[28]  Carlo Catalano,et al.  Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. , 2004, Gastroenterology.

[29]  E. Weitzman,et al.  Risk and reluctance: understanding impediments to colorectal cancer screening. , 2001, Preventive medicine.

[30]  岩崎 民子.  SOURCES AND EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION : United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes , 2002 .

[31]  C H McCollough,et al.  Detection of colorectal polyps by computed tomographic colography: feasibility of a novel technique. , 1996, Gastroenterology.

[32]  C. G. Coin,et al.  Computerized radiology of the colon: a potential screening technique. , 1983, Computerized radiology : official journal of the Computerized Tomography Society.

[33]  G. Pröhl,et al.  Internal exposure from the ingestion of foods contaminated by 137Cs after the Chernobyl accident--report 2. Ingestion doses of the rural population of Ukraine up to 12 y after the accident (1986-1997). , 2000, Health physics.

[34]  Marc Baekelandt,et al.  Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance. , 2002, Radiology.

[35]  Stuart A. Taylor,et al.  Multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of collimation, pitch, and orientation on polyp detection in a human colectomy specimen. , 2003, Radiology.

[36]  R. Coates,et al.  Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population , 2004, Cancer.

[37]  R. Ehman,et al.  Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[38]  W. Eckelman,et al.  NCRP report no. 93: Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland (1987). US$15.00 , 1988 .

[39]  J R Hecht,et al.  CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions. , 1999, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[40]  G. Howe.  Lung cancer mortality between 1950 and 1987 after exposure to fractionated moderate-dose-rate ionizing radiation in the Canadian fluoroscopy cohort study and a comparison with lung cancer mortality in the Atomic Bomb survivors study. , 1995, Radiation research.

[41]  L. Weinstock,et al.  Patient Preferences for CT Colonography, Conventional Colonoscopy, and Bowel Preparation , 2003, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[42]  Eric J Feuer,et al.  Age‐conditional probabilities of developing cancer , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[43]  W. K. Sinclair,et al.  The relative contributions of different organ sites to the total cancer mortality associated with low-dose radiation exposure , 1991, Annals of the ICRP.

[44]  Sujha Subramanian,et al.  Use of Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Evidence from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey , 2005, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[45]  C. Johnson,et al.  Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. , 2003, Radiology.

[46]  M. Kalra,et al.  Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. , 2004, Radiology.

[47]  Icrp.  1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection , 1991 .

[48]  Icrp.  Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 60 , 1991 .

[49]  Richard Wakeford,et al.  Uncertainties in Fatal Cancer Risk Estimates Used in Radiation Protection , 1998 .

[50]  M. Zalis,et al.  An analysis of the potential impact of computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy) on colonoscopy demand. , 2004, Gastroenterology.

[51]  C. Catalano,et al.  Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. , 2003, Radiology.

[52]  J. Yee,et al.  Patient experience and preferences toward colon cancer screening: a comparison of virtual colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. , 2001, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[53]  R. Capocaccia,et al.  Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence , 2001, Gut.

[54]  K. Akahane,et al.  Outline of NCRP Report No. 136 “Evaluation of the Linear-Nonthreshold Dose-Response Model for Ionizing Radiation” , 2001 .

[55]  L. Joseph Melton,et al.  A prospective, controlled assessment of factors influencing acceptance of screening colonoscopy , 2002 .

[56]  B. Monsees,et al.  The Mammography Quality Standards Act. An overview of the regulations and guidance. , 2000, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[57]  D. Wright,et al.  Influence of Dose and Its Distribution in Time on Dose‐Response Relationships for Low–LET Radiations , 1981 .

[58]  P. Schonken,et al.  Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation , 1991 .

[59]  C. McCollough,et al.  CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom , 2004, Abdominal Imaging.

[60]  James Perumpillichira,et al.  CT colonography: digital subtraction bowel cleansing with mucosal reconstruction initial observations. , 2003, Radiology.

[61]  D. Brenner,et al.  Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.