Major radiodiagnostic imaging in pregnancy and the risk of childhood malignancy: a population-based cohort study in Ontario

Joel G Ray, Michael J Schull, Marcelo L Urquia, John J You, Astrid Guttmann, Marian J Vermeulen, Joel G Ray, Michael J Schull, Marcelo L Urquia, John J You, Astrid Guttmann, Marian J Vermeulen

Abstract

Background: The association between fetal exposure to major radiodiagnostic testing in pregnancy-computed tomography (CT) and radionuclide imaging-and the risk of childhood cancer is not established.

Methods and findings: We completed a population-based study of 1.8 million maternal-child pairs in the province of Ontario, from 1991 to 2008. We used Ontario's universal health care-linked administrative databases to identify all term obstetrical deliveries and newborn records, inpatient and outpatient major radiodiagnostic services, as well as all children with a malignancy after birth. There were 5,590 mothers exposed to major radiodiagnostic testing in pregnancy (3.0 per 1,000) and 1,829,927 mothers not exposed. The rate of radiodiagnostic testing increased from 1.1 to 6.3 per 1,000 pregnancies over the study period; about 73% of tests were CT scans. After a median duration of follow-up of 8.9 years, four childhood cancers arose in the exposed group (1.13 per 10,000 person-years) and 2,539 cancers in the unexposed group (1.56 per 10,000 person-years), a crude hazard ratio of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.26-1.82). After adjusting for maternal age, income quintile, urban status, and maternal cancer, as well as infant sex, chromosomal or congenital anomalies, and major radiodiagnostic test exposure after birth, the risk was essentially unchanged (hazard ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.25-1.80).

Conclusions: Although major radiodiagnostic testing is now performed in about 1 in 160 pregnancies in Ontario, the absolute annual risk of childhood malignancy following exposure in utero remains about 1 in 10,000. Since the upper confidence limit of the relative risk of malignancy may be as high as 1.8 times that of an unexposed pregnancy, we cannot exclude the possibility that fetal exposure to CT or radionuclide imaging is carcinogenic.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Annual rate of major radiodiagnostic…
Figure 1. Annual rate of major radiodiagnostic testing in pregnancy in Ontario over time.
Data are presented for radionuclide testing (lower solid line), CT scan (upper dashed line), and both (solid bars with total number per year).
Figure 2. Risk of childhood cancer in…
Figure 2. Risk of childhood cancer in the offspring of women exposed (lower solid) and not exposed (upper dashed) to a major radiodiagnostic test in pregnancy.

References

    1. Leading Causes of Death and Hospitalization in Canada. Ottawa: Public Health Agency of Canada; Available: . Accessed 10 July 2010.
    1. Linabery AM, Ross JA. Trends in childhood cancer incidence in the U.S. (1992–2004). Cancer. 2008;112:416–432.
    1. Stack M, Walsh PM, Comber H, Ryan CA, O'Lorcain P. Childhood cancer in Ireland: a population-based study. Arch Dis Child. 2007;92:890–897.
    1. Plon SE, Nathanson K. Inherited susceptibility for pediatric cancer. Cancer J. 2005;11:255–267.
    1. Doll R, Wakeford R. Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation. Br J Radiol. 1997;70:130–139.
    1. Patel SJ, Reede DL, Katz DS, Subramaniam R, Amorosa JK. Imaging the pregnant patient for nonobstetric conditions: algorithms and radiation dose considerations. Radiographics. 2007;27:1705–1722.
    1. Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L, Frangos AJ, Sunshine JH. Recent trends in utilization rates of abdominal imaging: the relative roles of radiologists and nonradiologist physicians. J Am Coll Radiol. 2008;5:744–747.
    1. Bhargavan M. Trends in the utilization of medical procedures that use ionizing radiation. Health Phys. 2008;95:612–627.
    1. Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:849–857.
    1. Broder J, Warshauer DM. Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the adult emergency department, 2000–2005. Emerg Radiol. 2006;13:25–30.
    1. Ray JG, Singh G, Burrows RF. Evidence for suboptimal use of periconceptional folic acid supplements globally. BJOG. 2004;111:399–408.
    1. Yoshimoto Y, Delongchamp R, Mabuchi K. In-utero exposed atomic bomb survivors: cancer risk update. Lancet. 1994;344:345–346.
    1. Miller RW, Boice JD., Jr Cancer after intrauterine exposure to the atomic bomb. Radiat Res. 1997;147:396–397.
    1. Preston DL, Cullings H, Suyama A, Funamoto S, Nishi N, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in utero or as young children. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:428–436.
    1. Naumburg E, Bellocco R, Cnattingius S, Hall P, Boice JD, Jr, et al. Intrauterine exposure to diagnostic X rays and risk of childhood leukemia subtypes. Radiat Res. 2001;156:718–723.
    1. Stewart A, Kneale GW. Radiation dose effects in relation to obstetric x-rays and childhood cancers. Lancet. 1970;i:1185–1188.
    1. Bithell JF. Epidemiological studies of children irradiated in utero. In: Baverstock KF, Stather JW, editors. Low dose radiation: biological bases of risk assessment. London: Taylor and Francis; 1989. pp. 77–87.
    1. Linet MS, Kim KP, Rajaraman P. Children's exposure to diagnostic medical radiation and cancer risk: epidemiologic and dosimetric considerations. Pediatr Radiol. 2009;39(Suppl 1):S4–S26.
    1. Chen MM, Coakley FV, Kaimal A, Laros RK., Jr Guidelines for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging use during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:333–340.
    1. Wakeford R. Childhood leukaemia following medical diagnostic exposure to ionizing radiation in utero or after birth. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;132:166–174.
    1. Smans K, Struelens L, Smet M, Bosmans H, Vanhavere F. Patient dose in neonatal units. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;131:143–147.
    1. Dougeni ED, Delis HB, Karatza AA, Kalogeropoulou CP, Skiadopoulos SG, et al. Dose and image quality optimization in neonatal radiography. Br J Radiol. 2007;80:807–815.
    1. Joseph KS, Kramer MS, Marcoux S, Ohlsson A, Wen SW, et al. Determinants of preterm birth rates in Canada from 1981 through 1983 and from 1992 through 1994. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1434–1439.
    1. Toh S, Mitchell AA, Werler MM, Hernandez-Diaz S. Sensitivity and specificity of computerized algorithms to classify gestational periods in the absence of information on date of conception. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167:633–640.
    1. Quantin C, Gouyon B, Avillach P, Ferdynus C, Sagot P, et al. Using discharge abstracts to evaluate a regional perinatal network: assessment of the linkage procedure of anonymous data. Int J Telemed Appl. 2009;2009:181842.
    1. Méray N, Reitsma JB, Ravelli AC, Bonsel GJ. Probabilistic record linkage is a valid and transparent tool to combine databases without a patient identification number. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:883–891.
    1. Herman AA, McCarthy BJ, Bakewell JM, Ward RH, Mueller BA, et al. Data linkage methods used in maternally-linked birth and infant death surveillance data sets from the United States (Georgia, Missouri, Utah and Washington State), Israel, Norway, Scotland and Western Australia. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 1997;11(Suppl 1):5–22.
    1. Fair M, Cyr M, Allen AC, Wen SW, Guyon G, et al. An assessment of the validity of a computer system for probabilistic record linkage of birth and infant death records in Canada. The Fetal and Infant Health Study Group. Chronic Dis Can. 2000;21:8–13.
    1. You JJ, Alter DA, Iron K, Slaughter PM, Kopp A, et al. Diagnostic services in Ontario: descriptive analysis and jurisdictional review. Toronto: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2007. Available: . Accessed 10 July 2010.
    1. You JJ, Laupacis A, Newman A, Bell CM. Non-adherence to recommendations for further testing after outpatient CT and MRI. Am J Med. 2010;123:557.e1–557.e8.
    1. Marrett LD, Clarke EA, Hatcher J, Weir HK. Epidemiologic research using the Ontario Cancer Registry. Can J Public Health. 1986;77(Suppl 1):79–85.
    1. McLaughlin JR, Kreiger N, Marrett LD, Holowaty EJ. Cancer incidence registration and trends in Ontario. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27:1520–1524.
    1. You JJ, Alter DA, Stukel TA, McDonald SD, Laupacis A. Proliferation of prenatal ultrasonography. CMAJ. 2010;182:143–151.
    1. Mettler FA, Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology. 2008;248:254–263.
    1. Angel E, Wellnitz CV, Goodsitt MM, Yaghmai N, DeMarco JJ, et al. Radiation dose to the fetus for pregnant patients undergoing multidetector CT imaging: Monte Carlo simulations estimating fetal dose for a range of gestational age and patient size. Radiology. 2008;249:220–227.
    1. Mole RH. Childhood cancer after prenatal exposure to diagnostic X-ray examinations in Britain. Br J Cancer. 1990;62:152–168.
    1. Brent RL. Saving lives and changing family histories: appropriate counseling of pregnant women and men and women of reproductive age, concerning the risk of diagnostic radiation exposures during and before pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:4–24.
    1. Ratnapalan S, Bona N, Chandra K, Koren G. Physicians' perceptions of teratogenic risk associated with radiography and CT during early pregnancy. AJR. 2004;182:1107–1109.
    1. Prologo JD, Gilkeson RC, Diaz M, Asaad J. CT pulmonary angiography: a comparative analysis of the utilization patterns in emergency department and hospitalized patients between 1998 and 2003. AJR. 2004;183:1093–1096.
    1. Kidwell CS, Hsia AW. Imaging of the brain and cerebral vasculature in patients with suspected stroke: advantages and disadvantages of CT and MRI. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2006;6:9–16.
    1. Kim K, Lee CC, Song KJ, Kim W, Suh G, et al. The impact of helical computed tomography on the negative appendectomy rate: a multi-center comparison. J Emerg Med. 2008;34:3–6.
    1. Fedullo PF, Tapson VF. Clinical practice. The evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1247–1256.
    1. Mason E, Rosene-Montella K, Powrie R. Medical problems during pregnancy. Med Clin North Am. 1998;82:249–269.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa