[Intl_DxMedPhys] New JAMA IM article on CT radiation dose and future cancers

[Matt Wait]

I did miss that, thanks for flagging. A good reason to completely avoid using their product, IMO.

Matt Wait, MS, DABR, DABSNM, MRSE
Senior Diagnostic Physicist
Assistant Radiation Safety Officer
Assistant Residency Director
Kaiser Permanente
Southern Permanente Medical Group
Medical Imaging Technology and Informatics
4867 Sunset Blvd
Los Angeles, CA 90027
x5347 (office)
(818) 232-2427 (mobile phone)

From: Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list-bounces at lists.osu.edu> On Behalf Of Robert Walker via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2025 5:52 PM
Cc: intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu
Subject: Re: [Intl_DxMedPhys] New JAMA IM article on CT radiation dose and future cancers


Caution: This email came from outside Kaiser Permanente. Do not open attachments or click on links if you do not recognize the sender.

________________________________
Thanks for going on the record Mark. In case you missed it, the lead author is also a cofounder of Alara Imaging, the steward of the CT radiation dose CMS measure. On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 8: 29 AM Mark Supanich via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list
Thanks for going on the record Mark.

In case you missed it, the lead author is also a cofounder of Alara Imaging, the steward of the CT radiation dose CMS measure.


On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 8:29 AM Mark Supanich via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu<mailto:intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>> wrote:
There's a new article in JAMA internal medicine out predicting a large number of future cancers from CT scans. https: //jamanetwork. com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2832778 The work is entirely statistical in nature, there is no
There's a new article in JAMA internal medicine out predicting a large number of future cancers from CT scans. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2832778__;!!KGKeukY!2FMKKRWdeH9XikiIqGF3OJFoKDgetiTWYqVGMm7w0sQjW541Sj0vBjZYv6eLzrJR5uN4pGKPG_dD8Y6LxiuBBwzUitaECCleYU9vWdY$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2832778__;!!KGKeukY!3QiV5I4K5v5DkFeVCQcvqSvpeu1GCW4Xu2kfC-OIisjve02FMcil1jtQ4DKwavLox_91CTk9e1T7WF2R_hfH5GcmWjHVWZJE1htAOpCHDAyPO8c$>
 The work is entirely statistical in nature, there is no cohort study or causal link found, just multiplying the presumed very small individual risk of each CT scan times the tens of millions scans done each year. Please read the article and be prepared to discuss it with colleagues, patients, and physicians. A few key points to remember are:
1. When ordered for medically indicated reasons the benefits of CT far outweigh any future risk
2. CT catches cancer earlier, changes and informs diagnosis, and can help patients avoid unnecessary surgeries
3. Research into radiation risk from low levels of ionizing radiation is still a field of research and consensus on what the risk is has not been reached
4. Many CT scans are performed in the last years of patient's lives and those CT scans can't contribute to future cancers (as the latency period for most solid cancers is at least 4 years). The authors only excluded scans that would have been performed in the last year of life from this paper. A more realistic exclusion of 4 or 5 years would significantly reduce the number of theoretical cancer inductions they claim.

If you want to point folks to a reasonably balanced write up - I suggest this one from Gizmodo (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://gizmodo.com/common-ct-scans-are-major-cancer-risk-study-claims-2000588963__;!!KGKeukY!2FMKKRWdeH9XikiIqGF3OJFoKDgetiTWYqVGMm7w0sQjW541Sj0vBjZYv6eLzrJR5uN4pGKPG_dD8Y6LxiuBBwzUitaECCleUwvk1iU$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gizmodo.com/common-ct-scans-are-major-cancer-risk-study-claims-2000588963__;!!KGKeukY!3QiV5I4K5v5DkFeVCQcvqSvpeu1GCW4Xu2kfC-OIisjve02FMcil1jtQ4DKwavLox_91CTk9e1T7WF2R_hfH5GcmWjHVWZJE1htAOpCHBbVsiPc$>). The author reached out for outside comment in advance of publication, and I am grateful that he did, as I was able to (with help from Cynthia McCollough and Rebecca Milman) provide some additional context and critiques.




--

Mark P. Supanich, Ph.D., DABR, FAAPM (he/him)

Director – Diagnostic Medical Physics

Rush University System for Health

Associate Professor & Vice Chair for Physics and Informatics

Rush Medical College Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine

O: 312.563.4552

Book time with Mark Supanich<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/outlook.office.com/bookwithme/user/359cac7eb98843cab54ba1332197fc80@rush.edu?anonymous&ep=pcard__;!!KGKeukY!3QiV5I4K5v5DkFeVCQcvqSvpeu1GCW4Xu2kfC-OIisjve02FMcil1jtQ4DKwavLox_91CTk9e1T7WF2R_hfH5GcmWjHVWZJE1htAOpCHDsvvcb4$>

[RUSH]

NOTICE TO RECIPIENT:  If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. v.173.295  Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/private/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250415/87d6f4a9/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 14397 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/private/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250415/87d6f4a9/attachment.png>