Incidence rates of thyroid cancer and myeloid leukaemia in French Polynesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Agency for Research on Cancer regularly updates the monograph “Cancer Incidence in Five Continents” providing international comparisons of cancer incidence rates from population-based cancer registries around the world. The most recent data cover the 4-year period 1998–2002.1 In Figure 1, we show the ten regions/populations of the world with the highest and lowest incidence rates among women (age-standardised rates for the world population, ASRw) and their 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CI) for thyroid cancer (International Classification of Diseases ICD code: C73) and myeloid leukaemia (ICD code: C92.9). Regions/populations around the world with the highest and the lowest age standardized (world population) incidence rates of thyroid cancer and myeloid leukaemia among women with corresponding 95% Confidence Intervals, 1998–2002.1 Women in French Polynesia (245 405 inhabitants in 2002) show the highest incidence rates of both thyroid cancer (ASRw: 37.4/100 000, 95%CI: 31.8–43.03) and myeloid leukaemia (ASRw: 6.0/100 000, 95%CI: 3.7–8.3). The current observation is based on 180 new cases diagnosed during the 4-year period. Rates for myeloid leukaemia are based on 27 new cases for the same period. Incidences rates for these two cancer sites were also high among men: for the 4-year period, French Polynesian men rank fifth among the 300 involved cancer registries for thyroid cancer (incidence rates 5.4/100 000, 95%CI: 3.14–7.66, 26 cases) and 70th for myeloid leukaemia (incidence rates 4.7/100 000, 95%CI: 2.64–6.76, 23 cases). The Cancer Registry of French Polynesia started in 1988.2 The geographical comparison of ASRw between 175 registries for the period 1988–1992 shows that French Polynesia already ranked 2nd for thyroid cancer among females and 9th among males. During the same period, incidence of myeloid leukaemia in French Polynesia was relatively low and similar among females and males, ranking 80th and 79th, respectively.3 Radiation exposure is a well-established risk factor for these two cancers. In particular, leukaemia (especially myeloid leukaemia) and thyroid cancer were the first radiation-induced cancers reported among A-bomb survivors with the risk peaking within 10 years of exposure and remaining increased for at least several decades.4 Several studies among A-bomb survivors have also reported that in addition to dose and age at exposure, sex could modify radiation carcinogenesis with women being more prone than males to develop induced solid tumours.5 This was also observed after the Chernobyl accident.6 France conducted nuclear tests in French Polynesia in the atolls of Mururoa and Fangataufa between 1966 and 1995, 42 of these tests took place during the period 1966–1974 in the atmosphere.7 Reports on the health effects of the actual residual radioactive material from such tests have so far been reassuring,7 but these reports did not concern potential effects of contamination at time of nuclear tests. A case–control study aiming to evaluate the role of radio-iodine fallouts from atmospheric tests is ongoing on thyroid cancer,8 but only descriptive reports,2, 9 and no epidemiological studies have been undertaken on myeloid leukaemia. Comparisons of cancer incidences between cancer registries are difficult because of differences in completeness and accuracy of cancer registration and access to medical facilities. Incidence rates for myeloid leukaemia are generally based on few cases providing large overlapping confidence intervals. Therefore, differences between countries at high risk are not significant. Besides, no incidence data exist for previous periods for comparison. We believe, however, in the necessity of sustained surveillance of the population in this region to monitor health consequences of exposure to radiations emanating from nuclear tests. Yours sincerely, Christine Bouchardy*, Simone Benhamou* , Florent de Vathaire§, Robin Schaffar*, Elisabetta Rapiti*, * Geneva Cancer Registry, Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland, INSERM, U946, Fondation Jean Dausset-CEPH, Paris, France, CNRS UMR8200, Gustave-Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France, § INSERM, U605, Gustave-Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".