[Intl_DxMedPhys] Heads up on NEJM paper on radiation exposure in peds and hematologic cancer risk

[Mark Supanich]

An interesting note on this is that they also could have claimed that low levels of ionizing radiation have a positive impact on hematologic cancer rates. They cancer incidence rate (cases per 10,000 in their cohort) was lower for groups receiving between 5-15 mGy dose to the bone marrow than the group with no medical imaging. Their own calculated ERR was even <1 for the 5-10 mGy group.

I wonder why the headlines aren't: "exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation protects children from blood cancer"?
[Beaming face with smiling eyes]


________________________________
From: Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list-bounces at lists.osu.edu> on behalf of Li, Baojun via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2025 1:01 PM
To: intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Intl_DxMedPhys] Heads up on NEJM paper on radiation exposure in peds and hematologic cancer risk

Rush Email Security

This email originated from outside of RUSH. Do not click links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe. RUSH will never ask for user ID information via email.

If we replace “accumulative dose to bone marrow” with “total number of blood draws or hospital visits,” the relationship would likely still hold. By the authors’ reasoning, one could then conclude that blood draws or hospital visits cause cancer?!

If we replace “accumulative dose to bone marrow” with “total number of blood draws or hospital visits,” the relationship would likely still hold. By the authors’ reasoning, one could then conclude that blood draws or hospital visits cause cancer?!



In reality, children who undergo multiple CT examinations typically do so because of more severe or complex medical conditions. These patients are inherently predisposed to more hospital encounters and already have a higher baseline risk of hematologic malignancies, independent of imaging. The causal inference presented by the authors is deeply flawed and misleading.



Thanks,

Baojun





From: Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list-bounces+baojunli=bu.edu at lists.osu.edu> On Behalf Of Mark Supanich via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2025 6:35 PM
To: intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu
Subject: [Intl_DxMedPhys] Heads up on NEJM paper on radiation exposure in peds and hematologic cancer risk



Hi all, Just a heads up that NEJM published a paper from Smith-Bindman et al this afternoon. https: //www. nejm. org/doi/full/10. 1056/NEJMoa2502098?query=featured_home It’s an observational study of 3. 5+ million peds looking at cumulative

Hi all,





Just a heads up that NEJM published a paper from Smith-Bindman et al this afternoon. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2502098?query=featured_home__;!!KGKeukY!2MHb_kA2svjWLfMans_ZCrY3P4UKDl4VeOisa2vfJD2KDE7lRpa4OxiPL_tTQACGngVa3yc-5eOWgNShVvoug-ACgRKKIZqscfXam3eRLolaLb0$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2502098?query=featured_home__;!!KGKeukY!1m_oRWHMFCepm1fT1RIhzq46cPRXjfbhAvYKAO_5iNUOWD5mqN0G-iBdtAZYZy1h5_JOVRouzbgwoLM5N75lJAFaFMiQA3UTRzxHR2RjJ7wH4P8$>



It’s an observational study of 3.5+ million peds looking at cumulative exposure to ionizing radiation, particularly focused on bone marrow dose, and increased risk of hematologic cancer incidence. Their results claim an increased incidence of cancer in patients with exposure to imaging, and demonstrate a cummulative dose effect. They claim their results are not likely due to reverse causation as they have reasons for exams and symptoms of these cancers were not common reasons for exams. They also note their results are inline with the EPI-CT study. Of note, it appears that they looked at imaging from 1996-2017 – so much of the imaging likely occurred on imaging equipment without many of the modern dose reduction features.



This is sure to get media play and parents will certainly have questions as the media coverage develops. Continuing to focus on the judicious use of imaging, the benefits of diagnostic imaging to answer clinical questions, and the fact that modern imaging equipment adapts to patient size and uses optimized radiation will be key talking points.



>From the paper: “By the end of follow-up, 7.5% (280,548 of 3,724,623) of all the children and 9.2% (272 of 2961) of those in whom a hematologic cancer developed had received a cumulative dose of at least 1 mGy.”



[cid:image002.png at 01DC296C.75EA04F0]



There is a lot to look at in this paper and the supplemental materials, so more information/analysis is sure to come.

--

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

[RUSH]


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/private/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250919/d1e81ae0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 203494 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/private/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250919/d1e81ae0/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 21268 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/private/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250919/d1e81ae0/attachment-0001.png>