MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414277684 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2502098

Medical Imaging and Pediatric and Adolescent Hematologic Cancer Risk

2025· article· en· W4414277684 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rebecca Smith‐Bindman, Susan Alber, Marilyn L. Kwan, Priscila Pequeno, Wesley E. Bolch, Erin J. Aiello Bowles, Robert T. Greenlee, Natasha K. Stout, Sheila Weinmann, Lisa M. Moy, Carly Stewart, Melanie Francisco, Cameron Kofler, James R. Duncan, Jonathan M. Ducore, Malini Mahendra, Jason D. Pole, Diana L. Miglioretti

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteNational Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedical imagingCancerPediatric cancerHematologic NeoplasmsRisk assessmentRadiation therapyRadiation exposure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Assessing the risk of radiation-induced hematologic cancer from medical imaging in children and adolescents might support informed decisions on the use of imaging. METHODS: We followed a retrospective cohort of 3,724,623 children born between 1996 and 2016 in six U.S. health care systems and Ontario, Canada, until the earliest of cancer or benign-tumor diagnosis, death, end of health care coverage, an age of 21 years, or December 31, 2017. Radiation doses to active bone marrow from medical imaging were quantified. Associations between hematologic cancers and cumulative radiation exposure (vs. no exposure), with a lag of 6 months, were estimated with the use of continuous-time hazards models. RESULTS: During 35,715,325 person-years of follow-up (mean, 10.1 years per person), 2961 hematologic cancers were diagnosed, primarily lymphoid cancers (2349 [79.3%]), myeloid cancers or acute leukemia (460 [15.5%]), and histiocytic- or dendritic-cell cancers (129 [4.4%]). The mean (±SD) exposure among children exposed to at least 1 mGy was 14.0±23.1 mGy overall (for comparison, 13.7 mGy was the exposure from one computed tomographic [CT] scan of the head) and 24.5±36.4 mGy among children with hematologic cancer. Cancer risk increased with cumulative dose, with a relative risk (vs. no exposure) of 1.41 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 1.78) for 1 to less than 5 mGy, 1.82 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.43) for 15 to less than 20 mGy, and 3.59 (95% CI, 2.22 to 5.44) for 50 to less than 100 mGy. The cumulative radiation dose to bone marrow was associated with an increased risk of all hematologic cancers (excess relative risk per 100 mGy, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.70 to 3.51; P<0.001]; relative risk for 30 vs. 0 mGy, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.51 to 2.05]) and most tumor subtypes. The excess cumulative incidence of hematologic cancers by 21 years of age among children exposed to at least 30 mGy (mean, 57 mGy) was 25.6 per 10,000. We estimated that, in our cohort, 10.1% (95% CI, 5.8 to 14.2) of hematologic cancers may have been attributable to radiation exposure from medical imaging, with higher risks from the higher-dose medical-imaging tests such as CT. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests an association between exposure to radiation from medical imaging and a small but significantly increased risk of hematologic cancer among children and adolescents. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of Medicine→Same topicRadiation Dose and Imaging→French-language works237,207→