Background: Although high doses of ionizing radiation have long been linked to circulatory disease, evidence for an association at lower exposures remains controversial. However, recent analyses suggest excess relative risks at occupational exposure levels.Objectives: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize information on circulatory disease risks associated with moderate- and low-level whole-body ionizing radiation exposures.Methods: We conducted PubMed/ISI Thomson searches of peer-reviewed papers published since 1990 using the terms “radiation” AND “heart” AND “disease,” OR “radiation” AND “stroke,” OR “radiation” AND “circulatory” AND “disease.” Radiation exposures had to be whole-body, with a cumulative mean dose of < 0.5 Sv, or at a low dose rate (< 10 mSv/day). We estimated population risks of circulatory disease from low-level radiation exposure using excess relative risk estimates from this meta-analysis and current mortality rates for nine major developed countries.Results...

Ionizing radiation is a known human carcinogen that can induce a variety of biological effects depending on the physical nature, duration, doses and dose-rates of exposure. However, the magnitude of health risks at low doses and dose-rates (below 100mSv and/or 0.1mSvmin(-1)) remains controversial due to a lack of direct human evidence. It is anticipated that significant insights will emerge from the integration of epidemiological and biological research, made possible by molecular epidemiology studies incorporating biomarkers and bioassays. A number of these have been used to investigate exposure, effects and susceptibility to ionizing radiation, albeit often at higher doses and dose rates, with each reflecting time-limited cellular or physiological alterations. This review summarises the multidisciplinary work undertaken in the framework of the European project DoReMi (Low Dose Research towards Multidisciplinary Integration) to identify the most appropriate biomarkers for use in population studies. In addition to logistical and ethical considerations for conducting large-scale epidemiological studies, we discuss the relevance of their use for assessing the effects of low dose ionizing radiation exposure at the cellular and physiological level. We also propose a temporal classification of biomarkers that may be relevant for molecular epidemiology studies which need to take into account the time elapsed since exposure. Finally, the integration of biology with epidemiology requires careful planning and enhanced discussions between the epidemiology, biology and dosimetry communities in order to determine the most important questions to be addressed in light of pragmatic considerations including the appropriate population to be investigated (occupationally, environmentally or medically exposed), and study design. The consideration of the logistics of biological sample collection, processing and storing and the choice of biomarker or bioassay, as well as awareness of potential confounding factors, are also essential.

Little, M. P., Tawn, E. J., Tzoulaki, I., Wakeford, R., Hildebrandt, G., Paris, F., Tapio, S. and Elliott, P. A Systematic Review of Epidemiological Associations Between Low and Moderate Doses of Ionizing Radiation and Late Cardiovascular Effects, and Their Possible Mechanisms. Radiat. Res. 169, 99–109 (2008).The link between high doses of ionizing radiation and damage to the heart and coronary arteries is established. In this paper, we systematically review the epidemiological evidence for associations between low and moderate doses (<5 Gy) of ionizing radiation and late-occurring cardiovascular disease. Risks per unit dose in epidemiological studies vary over at least two orders of magnitude, possibly a result of confounding factors. An examination of possible biological mechanisms indicates that the most likely causative effect of radiation exposure is damage to endothelial cells and subsequent induction of an inflammatory response, although it seems unlikely that this would extend to low-dose and low-dose-rate exposure. However, a role for somatic mutation has been proposed that would indicate a stochastic effect. In the absence of a convincing mechanistic explanation of epidemiological evidence that is less than persuasive at present, a cause-and-effect interpretation of the reported statistical associations cannot be reliably inferred, although neither can it be reliably excluded. Further epidemiological and biological evidence will allow a firmer conclusion to be drawn.